Quantcast

Subscribe to:
POZ magazine
E-newsletters
Join POZ: Facebook MySpace Twitter Pinterest
Tumblr Google+ Flickr MySpace
POZ Personals
Sign In / Join
Username:
Password:
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
September 16, 2014, 01:50:02 AM

Login with username, password and session length


Members
Stats
  • Total Posts: 638896
  • Total Topics: 48502
  • Online Today: 190
  • Online Ever: 585
  • (January 07, 2014, 02:31:47 PM)
Users Online
Users: 3
Guests: 167
Total: 170

Welcome


Welcome to the POZ/AIDSmeds Community Forums, a round-the-clock discussion area for people with HIV/AIDS, their friends/family/caregivers, and others concerned about HIV/AIDS.  Click on the links below to browse our various forums; scroll down for a glance at the most recent posts; or join in the conversation yourself by registering on the left side of this page.

Privacy Warning:  Please realize that these forums are open to all, and are fully searchable via Google and other search engines. If you are HIV positive and disclose this in our forums, then it is almost the same thing as telling the whole world (or at least the World Wide Web). If this concerns you, then do not use a username or avatar that are self-identifying in any way. We do not allow the deletion of anything you post in these forums, so think before you post.

  • The information shared in these forums, by moderators and members, is designed to complement, not replace, the relationship between an individual and his/her own physician.

  • All members of these forums are, by default, not considered to be licensed medical providers. If otherwise, users must clearly define themselves as such.

  • Forums members must behave at all times with respect and honesty. Posting guidelines, including time-out and banning policies, have been established by the moderators of these forums. Click here for “Am I Infected?” posting guidelines. Click here for posting guidelines pertaining to all other POZ/AIDSmeds community forums.

  • We ask all forums members to provide references for health/medical/scientific information they provide, when it is not a personal experience being discussed. Please provide hyperlinks with full URLs or full citations of published works not available via the Internet. Additionally, all forums members must post information which are true and correct to their knowledge.

  • Product advertisement—including links; banners; editorial content; and clinical trial, study or survey participation—is strictly prohibited by forums members unless permission has been secured from POZ.

To change forums navigation language settings, click here (members only), Register now

Para cambiar sus preferencias de los foros en español, haz clic aquí (sólo miembros), Regístrate ahora

Finished Reading This? You can collapse this or any other box on this page by clicking the symbol in each box.

Author Topic: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?  (Read 49312 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline keyite

  • Member
  • Posts: 514
Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« on: March 21, 2007, 08:05:55 AM »
This came up in another thread and rather than hijacking it even more than I had done already I thought it might be worth starting a new one.

Before my diagnosis my informed view was that the likelihood of getting infected via oral sex was real but insignificant: no risk associated with being on the receiving end and very small risk associated with giving it. I reasoned that it would be more likely for me to be hit by the proverbial meteor than getting infected via oral sex. So I indulged on that score.

Guess what? I lost out on that risk assessment. Because I went through the seroconversion illness I can be pretty clear when and via what behaviours I was infected. The overwhelming likelihood is that I was infected when giving a blowjob. The only other risk scenario is protected anal sex as the top (insertive partner).

Since my diagnosis I have found two things; (1) a lot of poz people consider oral sex a no-risk activity (not low risk, but no-risk) and (2) I keep coming across other people who report they too were infected via oral sex, on this board, elsewhere on the net and even one friend of a friend. The guy at the clinic who gave me the diagnosis told me they come across stories like mine 'with some regularity'. Quite the contradiction.

I feel so torn on what to do about this contradiction. On one hand, I feel I must challenge others making the assertion that there is no risk, not least because if I don't, then I'm ultimately denying my own experience and that doesn't seem very healthy. On the other hand, I have been acutely conscious that it might be interpreted as denial on my part, me trying to make myself less 'deserving' of infection or otherwise 'better' than other poz people. Certainly, you could have cut the air the first time I did challenge this assumption in a support group I attended for a while for newly diagnosed guys. But it really isn't where I'm coming from. I have had unprotected anal sex in the past and I could just as well have been infected that way - it is just long enough ago that I know that isn't actually how I was infected. I genuinely don't think anyone 'deserves' HIV.

Those that consider oral sex a no-risk activity often seem to dismiss anecdotal evidence from people like me as insufficient, unreliable or just plain steeped in denial. But isn't all reported method of transmission fundamentally down to anecdotal evidence? There isn't a scientist or doctor there ready with a clipboard at the moment transmission takes place. When unprotected intercourse has taken place it is invariably assumed that it was the culprit but doesn't this assumption equally open up the possibility that some of these might in fact have been through oral sex? Isn't the reality that we are unlikely to ever be able to conclusive prove it a no-risk activity?

Don't get me wrong: I do still recognise oral sex is associated with relative low risk - if it was high risk then this would have been an epidemic on quite a different scale. And I still won't be using a condom for blowjobs. But there is still, to my mind, a difference between 'low risk' and 'no risk'. To  quite a few this difference is clearly just splitting hairs and I totally understand that point of view - after all, that was broadly my own risk assessment before I was infected. But to others, that small difference may well translate into awareness and some precautions, however small (not really talking about superinfection here, but more the risk of infecting neggies). It also closely intertwines with the issue of disclosure. From my own perspective, and perhaps predictably since I'm still newly diagnosed, those fears/anxieties have certainly loomed very large on the few occasions I've had sex since diagnosis.

What does everyone else think? Am I barking mad? Is it just simply that I've beaten those incredible statistical odds, together with a handful of others, and that to beat them again (by infecting a neggie that way) would be inconceivable? Should I just 'get over it' and shut up about the whole thing? I realise there's a rhetorical slant to these questions but if this thread sinks into oblivion unanswered then I guess I have my answer... ;)

Offline jack

  • Member
  • Posts: 1,578
  • fomerly the loser known as Jake
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #1 on: March 21, 2007, 08:22:00 AM »
Its just not possible and most likely you are a liar. Have you not seen the results from the "scientific" surveys on this subject??? Well, if you haven't,you will.

Offline koi1

  • Member
  • Posts: 713
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #2 on: March 21, 2007, 08:27:50 AM »
Well, like you said, you did have unprotected anal sex. What you think of a seroconversion illness may not have been one. The seroconversion illness aspect of it is very unreliable in determining when someone was infected because up to half of people never get a seroconversion illness as I never did. Sometimes people equate a flu or a cold with it, when that is all it was. Some people assume  that just because they never got a seroconversion illness, they are negative. There is a lot of misinformation out there. Now what I have heard is that it is possible under some circumstances to get HIV infected through oral sex, but they are very minute, and they have not been able to isolate a significant amount of credible people who have gotten it this way, where they can prove that this is how it happened. The cdc still uses the oral sex moderate risk model, but is is now under a right wing influence.

I don't know that feeling anger over how you got it is healthy for you. I don't know anyone personally that claims to have gotten it through oral sex. Sometimes people will report this because they find it shameful to admit that they engaged in such a "dirty unatural" practice of the backdoor love.

Now if my family asked me how I got it which, they would not be crass enough to ask, I would just say through sexual behavior, and if they wanted the specifics i would just come out and say it. "I got my butt plowed, there are you happy!?" Only because it would help my nieces and nephews to avoid this terrible disease, that still has way too much stigma attached to it, because of the hatred of us homosexuals, that refuses to die.


rob
diagnosed on 11/20/06 viral load 23,000  cd4 97    8%
01/04/07 six weeks after diagnosis vl 53,000 cd4 cd4 70    6%
Began sustiva truvada 01/04/07
newest labs  drawn on 01/15/07  vl 1,100    cd4 119    7%
Drawn 02/10/07
cd4=160 viral load= 131 percentage= 8%
New labs 3/10/07 (two months on sustiva truvada
cd4 count 292  percentage 14 viral load undetectable

Offline jack

  • Member
  • Posts: 1,578
  • fomerly the loser known as Jake
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #3 on: March 21, 2007, 08:35:04 AM »
And now it is a right wing plot. Just incredible. I knew W created all terrorists,and he created the hurricanes, but I didnt realize he was also behind the scheme to convince the public that sucking cock might cause hiv infection.
Since when did surveys become science?

Offline jkinatl2

  • Member
  • Posts: 6,007
  • Doo. Dah. Dipp-ity.
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #4 on: March 21, 2007, 08:37:09 AM »
Wow, Jack. Bitter much?

"Many people, especially in the gay community, turn to oral sex as a safer alternative in the age of AIDS. And with HIV rates rising, people need to remember that oral sex is safer sex. It's a reasonable alternative."

-Kimberly Page-Shafer, PhD, MPH

Welcome Thread

Offline koi1

  • Member
  • Posts: 713
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #5 on: March 21, 2007, 08:37:17 AM »
Jack, that was a little bit harsh. I truly believe that people can think that is how they got it. I don't think  keyite is a liar, just misinformed and confuesed, angry or all of the above. But what does it matter now? No scare tactics by any agency is going to keep people from getting it. But just to make keyite feel a little better, you can still get almost every other STD through oral sex, so suck off at your own risk people.

rob
diagnosed on 11/20/06 viral load 23,000  cd4 97    8%
01/04/07 six weeks after diagnosis vl 53,000 cd4 cd4 70    6%
Began sustiva truvada 01/04/07
newest labs  drawn on 01/15/07  vl 1,100    cd4 119    7%
Drawn 02/10/07
cd4=160 viral load= 131 percentage= 8%
New labs 3/10/07 (two months on sustiva truvada
cd4 count 292  percentage 14 viral load undetectable

Offline koi1

  • Member
  • Posts: 713
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #6 on: March 21, 2007, 08:39:10 AM »
Oh yeah, Jake the neocon fascist, I remember you. :D :D :D :D :D :D :D The W is such a gooooood president.



diagnosed on 11/20/06 viral load 23,000  cd4 97    8%
01/04/07 six weeks after diagnosis vl 53,000 cd4 cd4 70    6%
Began sustiva truvada 01/04/07
newest labs  drawn on 01/15/07  vl 1,100    cd4 119    7%
Drawn 02/10/07
cd4=160 viral load= 131 percentage= 8%
New labs 3/10/07 (two months on sustiva truvada
cd4 count 292  percentage 14 viral load undetectable

Offline keyite

  • Member
  • Posts: 514
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #7 on: March 21, 2007, 08:40:53 AM »
Well, like you said, you did have unprotected anal sex. What you think of a seroconversion illness may not have been one. The seroconversion illness aspect of it is very unreliable in determining when someone was infected because up to half of people never get a seroconversion illness as I never did. Sometimes people equate a flu or a cold with it, when that is all it was.

Yes, I have had unprotected anal sex - long enough ago, and with enough negative test results in between to know I could not have been infected that way. Long story, but I do know when I had the seroconversion illness - I had the p24 antigen test at the time (because flu just did not ring true) and it came back inconclusive - this should have sent alarm bells ringing but the doc at the time made a mistake in reassuring me that I was uninfected. I have had quite regular HIV tests prior to diagnosis so I know for sure infection took place in a relatively limited window.

I don't know that feeling anger over how you got it is healthy for you.

Sure, I have felt anger about getting infected (mostly directed inwards) but that isn't actually where I'm at now and it isn't what brought about this post.

Offline Matty the Damned

  • Member
  • Posts: 12,228
  • Ninja Please
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #8 on: March 21, 2007, 08:45:00 AM »
Christ Jakey! I think you need one of these:


Key was simply asking a question.

Key,

Ignore Jack, he has terminal cranky. Rob has nailed this one (so to speak) when he points out:

Well, like you said, you did have unprotected anal sex.

Therein lies your answer, dearest.

MtD

Offline koi1

  • Member
  • Posts: 713
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #9 on: March 21, 2007, 08:49:08 AM »
Well, like I said, you truly must believe that is the way you got it. That is more real to you than anything any of us can say, not even Jack's kind words can sway you. But the overwhelming scientific evidence contradicts your position. There is nothing wrong with swimming upstream when there is a purpose. I just don't know if it could ever be proven that someone got it just by having oral sex. I hope you won't let it get to you too much. Your health is more imprtant now, than what any of us thinks.

rob
diagnosed on 11/20/06 viral load 23,000  cd4 97    8%
01/04/07 six weeks after diagnosis vl 53,000 cd4 cd4 70    6%
Began sustiva truvada 01/04/07
newest labs  drawn on 01/15/07  vl 1,100    cd4 119    7%
Drawn 02/10/07
cd4=160 viral load= 131 percentage= 8%
New labs 3/10/07 (two months on sustiva truvada
cd4 count 292  percentage 14 viral load undetectable

Offline ACinKC

  • Member
  • Posts: 2,994
  • Bring it VIRUS! #2 Ranked In-crowd Member!
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #10 on: March 21, 2007, 09:40:27 AM »
Jack.  Did the two trannies in vegas tear you a new one?  WTF man! 

Key,

While alot of us disagree with the risk of oral sex it ultimately doesnt matter.  In relation to the advice we give in the AM I INFECTED forum we ONLY give first tier peer reviewed quantifiable scientific results and thus far the science has not proven that you can become infected through oral sex.  IF and thats a BIG IF in my opinion, they come out with the aforementiond scientific study that conclusively proves over a broad spectrum of subjects that it indeed is possible you may see a change.  But I wouldnt hold my breath on that one, I for one just don't think it happens. 

I am not calling you liar.  For you to be lying you have to believe something other than what you are telling us and I am positive you aren't doing that.  How you got it doesnt make you less of a pozzie, just because others don't believe in how you became infected doesnt mean we look down on you either.  We are one group, with one blood bourne virus that didnt discriminate on what we were doing, who we were or how we live our lives.  It invaded and took hold and now we all fight it TOGETHER.  Thats all that matters.

Andrew
LIFE is not a race to the grave with the intention of arriving safely
in a pretty and well-preserved body, but, rather to skid in broadside,
thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming--WOW! WHAT A
RIDE!!!

Offline Florida69

  • Member
  • Posts: 428
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #11 on: March 21, 2007, 09:50:30 AM »
Let me see if I understand this correctly, You think you contracted HIV from receiving oral.  If you gave oral, then you chances of contracting HIV are not as low as you would want to believe.  I know two people in the last year that say they contracted HIV from giving oral.  If there are any doctors in the house, that could help us with the correct information, please feel free. Now if you received oral you chances are non-existent, as you may know, saliva for the most part does not transmit the virus as it has been proven scientifically that there is very little HIV in saliva.  Now if you gave oral, you are still taking a big chance by even taken on someone bodily fluids such as precum.  We all know that precum is very much a carrier for the virus.  Receptive anal is high risk.  

With all that said I am sorry to hear about your positive test, and hope that you find your way like many of us have done.  I know that your days seem dark, I have been there.  You are not alone there are many of us on the same bus as you, and you can still live a fullfilling life, but you have to deal with your status of being virally enhanced, take better care of yourself, and always use protection.  It is okay to be mad, but take heart that this too shall pass.  Good luck, D

[attachment deleted by admin]
Nothing in the world can take the place of Persistence. Talent will not; nothing is more common than unsuccessful men with talent. Genius will not; unrewarded genius is almost a proverb. Education will not; the world is full of educated derelicts. Persistence and determination alone are omnipotent. The slogan 'Press On' has solved and always will solve the problems of the human race.
Calvin Coolidge

Offline racingmind

  • Member
  • Posts: 236
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #12 on: March 21, 2007, 10:16:05 AM »
Hmmm....
Has anyone responding to this thread noticed that the original poster is most likely British (based on spelling and how the dates are listed)?

Now, I know I'm probably gonna get shit for this, but you know what they say about British oral hygiene....

So, with that in mind, why are you so quick to dismiss the possibility for infection by performing oral sex on a male?

Just looking for clues here....
Tested Negative: 5/06
Tested Positive: 9/06 
9/06: CD4: 442 (28%) VL: +100,000
10/06: CD4: 323 (25%) VL: 243,440
11/06: CD4: 405 (28%) VL: 124,324
12/06: CD4: 450 (29%) VL: 114,600
1/07: CD4: 440 (27%) VL: 75,286
3/07: CD4: 459 (30%) VL: 44,860
5/07: CD4: 353 (24%) VL: 50,852
7/07: CD4: 437 (29%) VL: 39,475
9/07: CD4: 237 (32%) VL: 372,774
10/07: CD4: 324 (27%) VL: 115,454 
Started Atripla: 10/07
11/07: CD4: 524 (?%) VL: Undetectable!
2/08: CD4: 653 (35%) VL: undetectable
5/08: CD4: 822 (40%) VL: undetectable
8/08: CD4: 626 (35%) VL: undetectable
12/08: CD4: 619 (36%) VL: undetectable
3/09: CD4: 802 (38%) VL: undetectable
7/09: CD4: 1027 (43%) VL: not tested
10/09: CD4: 1045 (43%) VL: undetectable

Offline ACinKC

  • Member
  • Posts: 2,994
  • Bring it VIRUS! #2 Ranked In-crowd Member!
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #13 on: March 21, 2007, 10:23:51 AM »
Hmmm....
Has anyone responding to this thread noticed that the original poster is most likely British (based on spelling and how the dates are listed)?

Now, I know I'm probably gonna get shit for this, but you know what they say about British oral hygiene....

So, with that in mind, why are you so quick to dismiss the possibility for infection by performing oral sex on a male?

Just looking for clues here....

There have been several studies that indicate it does NOT happen.  I will again quote the wonderful Jonathan on this one....

http://forums.poz.com/index.php?topic=10310.msg127650#msg127650

The quajtification we use at AIDSMEDS is based on three distinct and separate studies conducted over the course of two decades with serodiscordasnt couples. We do not rely on anecdotal evidence insofar as HIV transmission is concerned, especially not now, where the current state of the scientific and epidemiological art is as advanced as it is. With more people living longer and healthier lives, a large enough collection of serodiscordant couples has finally emerged to create blind studies where HIV transmission routes can be studied with scientific quantification.

Here are some of the  scientific findings.


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.



LIFE is not a race to the grave with the intention of arriving safely
in a pretty and well-preserved body, but, rather to skid in broadside,
thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming--WOW! WHAT A
RIDE!!!

Offline ACinKC

  • Member
  • Posts: 2,994
  • Bring it VIRUS! #2 Ranked In-crowd Member!
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #14 on: March 21, 2007, 10:27:58 AM »
 Now if you gave oral, you are still taking a big chance by even taken on someone bodily fluids such as precum.  We all know that precum is very much a carrier for the virus.  Receptive anal is high risk.  

I'm sorry but the statistics don't show that you are "taking a big chance" when you give a blowjob.  At BEST its an extremely LOW risk but most likely only theoretical (according to the studies which is what we go by in the AM I forum). 

Andrew
(who understands that this means nothing in relation to Key's becoming infected, and respects him all the same!)
LIFE is not a race to the grave with the intention of arriving safely
in a pretty and well-preserved body, but, rather to skid in broadside,
thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming--WOW! WHAT A
RIDE!!!

Offline jack

  • Member
  • Posts: 1,578
  • fomerly the loser known as Jake
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #15 on: March 21, 2007, 10:34:00 AM »
I still want to see what they call "carefully controlled study". There can be no such thing without observation and strict guidelines. If you believe all participants are being honest than I guess results are correct but most of these can be no more credible than any other poll or exit results on voting day. No one knows what goes on in the booth and no one knows for sure what goes on in the bedroom,unless of course W is involved.
I know what I have done and how I got this virus, call it anecdotal if you want but its the fucking truth.

Offline keyite

  • Member
  • Posts: 514
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #16 on: March 21, 2007, 10:42:05 AM »
Hmmm....
Has anyone responding to this thread noticed that the original poster is most likely British (based on spelling and how the dates are listed)?

Now, I know I'm probably gonna get shit for this, but you know what they say about British oral hygiene....

LOL! I see what you're getting at but there are no known problems in my oral hygiene department. Yes, I live in the UK but wasn't born here and didn't grow up here - I hail from Scandinavia. But perhaps ALL Europeans have bad oral hygiene? A bit like ALL Americans are brash loud-mouths?  ;) ;D ;)

Offline scotttt

  • Member
  • Posts: 146
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #17 on: March 21, 2007, 10:50:09 AM »
I have one friend who told me initially that he got HIV from performing oral sex, but later told me that he got it from condomless anal sex.  He told me that he thought that telling himself and others that he got it through oral sex would be easier to swallow (pardon the pun). 

I think that many people feel that they will face harsh responses if they say that they had unprotected anal sex given the risk and therefore feel less threatened by saying that they were really careful and were just that unlucky one in a million.  It makes them feel less culpable or somehow less judged.

I also think that people have convenient memories.  My friend calls this the "Maury Factor".  A cheesy U.S. talk show (Maurie Povich) often has entire segments entitled something like "Who Be My Baby Daddy".  On these segments a woman claims to be 5000 percent sure that she knows who her baby daddy is, because she didn't have sex with anyone else other than the accused. A paternity test is given and guess what, the man she claims to be the baby daddy isn't.  Then she says something like "Oh yeah, there I forgot about that night with Tyrelll......."

Next week Tyrell is given a paternity test and the woman claims that she is now certain that he is her baby daddy.  Tyrell takes the test and he isn't the father.  She then responds with "Oh yeah, I forgot about........"

These women claim to be absolutely without a doubt certain what they did sexually and with whom they did it, and yet, they always seem to forget one or twenty other sexual encounters.

Sometimes we forget, sometimes we are drunk or high, etc.  Who knows.  As Rob stated, many times people have unprotected encounters and have no seroconversion symptoms.  They then have a lot of oral sex and get the flu.  They mistake the flu symptoms for a seroconversion illness and get tested.  They test positive and assume that they were infected more recently and that they got it from oral sex rather than the condomless anal sex that happened in the more distant past.

I find it hard to discount all the actual scientific data showing serodiscordant couples having unprotected oral sex (yes even with swallowing) and in ten years among some one hundred couples, not one HIV neggie was infected. 

I think it is always better to rely on scientific data than on the word of individuals who may have faulty memories or personal reasons as to being less than completely forthcoming regarding all the details of their sex lives.

Personally I don't give a rat's hairy ass how anyone got this thing.  It is a fucking virus, period.  The stigma needs to be stamped out.  Once the stigma is diminished there will be fewer reasons to be ashamed about how one was infected and less misinformation regarding transmission risks as a result.  Fear and paranoia based on extremely rare modes of transmission does nothing to limit the spread of this virus.  It only confuses people more and makes them feel less empowered in HIV prevention.  We know that the virus is overwhelmingly sexually transmitted through unprotected anal and vaginal sex, and very, very rarely, possibly transmitted from performing oral sex on a male partner. 


Offline ACinKC

  • Member
  • Posts: 2,994
  • Bring it VIRUS! #2 Ranked In-crowd Member!
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #18 on: March 21, 2007, 10:54:13 AM »
By the way this discussion usually doesnt end well.

Who's up for letting it go?



So says the one-eyed guy....so says us all?
LIFE is not a race to the grave with the intention of arriving safely
in a pretty and well-preserved body, but, rather to skid in broadside,
thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming--WOW! WHAT A
RIDE!!!

Offline David_CA

  • Member
  • Posts: 3,246
  • Joined: March 2006
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #19 on: March 21, 2007, 11:04:23 AM »
What I've always wondered is that when folks talk about oral sex, giving a blow job, specifically, are they talking about taking it to completion?  Although I believe the scientific evidence, I can almost see a difference between sucking a dick for a few minutes and having a mouth full of semen.  Most, if not all, of the studies I've read haven't really addressed that.  Anyway...

David
Black Friday 03-03-2006
03-23-06 CD4 359 @27.4% VL 75,938
06-01-06 CD4 462 @24.3% VL > 100,000
08-15-06 CD4 388 @22.8% VL >  "
10-21-06 CD4 285 @21.9% VL >  "
  Atripla started 12-01-2006
01-08-07 CD4 429 @26.8% VL 1872!
05-08-07 CD4 478 @28.1% VL 740
08-03-07 CD4 509 @31.8% VL 370
11-06-07 CD4 570 @30.0% VL 140
02-21-08 CD4 648 @32.4% VL 600
05-19-08 CD4 695 @33.1% VL < 48 undetectable!
08-21-08 CD4 725 @34.5%
11-11-08 CD4 672 @39.5%
02-11-09 CD4 773 @36.8%
05-11-09 CD4 615 @36.2%
08-19-09 CD4 770 @38.5%
11-19-09 CD4 944 @33.7%
02-17-10 CD4 678 @39.9%  
06-03-10 CD4 768 @34.9%
09-21-10 CD4 685 @40.3%
01-10-11 CD4 908 @36.3%
05-23-11 CD4 846 @36.8% VL 80
02-13-12 CD4 911 @41.4% VL<20
You must be the change you want to see in the world.  Mahatma Gandhi

Offline milker

  • Member
  • Posts: 4,034
  • Protected phone sex
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #20 on: March 21, 2007, 11:07:16 AM »
I'm a cum addict.

I've had gallons of cum in my mouth, even few hours after having a mouth cleaning at the dentist. I tested negative for 20 years of eating cum twice or more a day.
Then I got fucked without protection back in december. And I tested positive 2 months later.

Just my story.

Milker.
mid-dec: stupid ass
mid-jan: seroconversion
mid-feb: poz
mar 07: cd4 432 (35%) vl 54000
may 07: cd4 399 (28%) vl 27760
jul 07: cd4 403 (26%) vl 99241
oct 07: cd4 353 (24%) vl 29993
jan 08: cd4 332 (26%) vl 33308
mar 08: cd4 392 (23%) vl 75548
jun 08: cd4 325 (27%) vl 45880
oct 08: cd4 197 (20%) vl 154000 <== aids diagnosis
nov 2 08 start Atripla
nov 30 08: cd4 478 (23%) vl 1880 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
feb 19 09: cd4 398 (24%) vl 430 getting there!
apr 23 09: cd4 604 (29%) vl 50 woohoo :D :D
jul 30 09: cd4 512 (29%) vl undetectable :D :D
may 27 10: cd4 655 (32%) vl undetectable :D :D

Now accepting applications from blowjob ninjas™

Offline thunter34

  • Member
  • Posts: 7,314
  • His name is Carl.
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #21 on: March 21, 2007, 11:28:56 AM »
I'm a cum addict.

I've had gallons of cum in my mouth, even few hours after having a mouth cleaning at the dentist. I tested negative for 20 years of eating cum twice or more a day.
Then I got fucked without protection back in december. And I tested positive 2 months later.

Just my story.

Milker.


Hence the name Milker, I suppose.  I will confess that there's something I find rather hot about that post.
AIDS isn't for sissies.

Offline thunter34

  • Member
  • Posts: 7,314
  • His name is Carl.
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #22 on: March 21, 2007, 11:34:07 AM »
And Jack:  Sorry, but even I have to hop on you a bit about your response about W.  His administration has made a concerted effort to keep valuable information from the eyes and ears of those who need it most.  That's not my opinion- that's from the headlines.  Anybody remember all that HIV in tears stuff, btw?
AIDS isn't for sissies.

Offline Andy Velez

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • Posts: 24,686
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #23 on: March 21, 2007, 11:40:49 AM »
Jack, how about easing up here a bit. Disagreeing with someone is one thing and ok. Deciding you can call him a liar is something else and not acceptable.

Giving oral repeatedly comes up (no pun intended) in terms of the level of risk. I don't see us resolving it here but there is room for diverse opinions without going to war over it.

Andy Velez

Offline Robert

  • Member
  • Posts: 2,644
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #24 on: March 21, 2007, 11:51:23 AM »
There have been far too many people here who claim to be positive by oral infection to just brush it off.  Maybe I'm one of those suckers but I really see no reason to doubt the stories of our posters here at AM much less cast dispersions on them for blaming oral sex.  Because of the number of incidents reported here is small for even a web site, I imagine it's insignificant when it comes to scientific studies.  But that doesn't mean it isn't so.  Really, to say can't happen is to be as pigheaded as our friend Jake. 

robert
..........

Offline Moffie65

  • Member
  • Posts: 1,755
  • Living POZ since 1983
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #25 on: March 21, 2007, 12:01:04 PM »
I hail from Scandinavia. But perhaps ALL Europeans have bad oral hygiene? A bit like ALL Americans are brash loud-mouths?

Sorry Key, having grown up overseas with Europeans, I found this one hilarious.  (Probably because I relate)

Keyite brings up a very interesting question, and one that shouldn't be handled with such abandon as Jake, nor as much doubt as many have shown.

One must remember that even a pubic hair cut is the equivalent to an 8 lane highway to HIV.  This viral protein dosen't need much more than an open wound of any size, to come on in and have it's way with us.  We also forget that if one is not circumsized, then they are also particularly suceptible to infection through the skin.  Also, most any sexual activity can bruise the foreskin to an extent that infection, even orally is not totally out of the question.  

While I totally respect scientific study and do respect survey results when the numbers of those involved is of significant size to show some efficacy; I still have some difficulty accepting everything that is published as scientific fact.  We have lived for the last 6 years, and actually probably beyond that, under a false sense of accuracy as we now find more and more science is dictated from the highest levels of government.  Hush Jake/Jack.  W. lies about science and just about everything else, and has been lying for the better part of his life!

Beyond that, I have come to feel that it isn't particularly important how one becomes infected, but how they work through the following couple of years.  Truly Keyite has stated that it isn't terribly important, but he came here to discuss it and I think he deserves a decent discussion.

I cannot tell anyone that their means of infection was impossible, or in any other way different than my own.  I can however, study the results of research and find comfort in some of what I read, but it all must be taken in the context of the whole human experience to really be of value.  In that sense, who among us can stand there and tell Keyite he is lying?  I think none of us.  Probably more like none of us really know the answer, and his proposed infection route, under the correct circumstances is not out of the question.

I would close by simply saying, I hope you can work through this soon, as these questions are really unimportant in the scope of one's lifetime.  It is far better to work our way through these things quickly, and move on.  Living with a disease that can kill you, tends to make the rest of your life come into perspective pretty quickly, and entertaining postive and uplifting thoughts is far better for your long term health and survival.  

Take your time, and make every day count for something postive.

Love,
The Bible contains 6 admonishments to homosexuals,
and 362 to heterosexuals.
This doesn't mean that God doesn't love heterosexuals,
It's just that they need more supervision.
Lynn Lavne

Offline Basquo

  • Member
  • Posts: 3,256
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #26 on: March 21, 2007, 12:23:11 PM »
So, Milker, you going to join us in San Francisco?? ;D

Offline scotttt

  • Member
  • Posts: 146
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #27 on: March 21, 2007, 12:26:40 PM »
"We also forget that if one is not circumsized, then they are also particularly suceptible to infection through the skin.  Also, most any sexual activity can bruise the foreskin to an extent that infection, even orally is not totally out of the question."

 Talk about fanning the flames of fear!!!!!

Cirumcission or not, there have been NO DOCUMENTED CASES of HIV FROM RECEIVING ORAL SEX!!!  To even suggest this or to bring this up is to fuel the flames of worry wort paranoiia.  Let's look at real transmission risks, not nearly impossible risks.  Remember, worry worts read these threads too. 

Edited to add:

Since when did saliva become an infectious agent?!?!?!?!. 
« Last Edit: March 21, 2007, 01:53:54 PM by scotttt »

Offline ACinKC

  • Member
  • Posts: 2,994
  • Bring it VIRUS! #2 Ranked In-crowd Member!
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #28 on: March 21, 2007, 12:29:59 PM »
We will deal with the Worried Ones in the Am I infected forums just fine.  It is ok to have a differing of opinion between the members here.  So lighten up just a hair on those with opposing views.  It will make this thread go alot better.
LIFE is not a race to the grave with the intention of arriving safely
in a pretty and well-preserved body, but, rather to skid in broadside,
thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming--WOW! WHAT A
RIDE!!!

Offline Teresa

  • Member
  • Posts: 1,753
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #29 on: March 21, 2007, 12:30:47 PM »
We discussed this topic with hubby's Dr. She said that oral was a low risk. Not as much of a risk as unprotected vaginal or anal sex but it was still a risk.
For me I will take the advice of hubby's Dr over a scientific study.

Hugs
Teresa
Hubby HIV+ 5/5/06
CD4:320
  %: 26.7
 VL: <20
Atripla (started it 8/24/06)
 

Offline thunter34

  • Member
  • Posts: 7,314
  • His name is Carl.
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #30 on: March 21, 2007, 12:31:32 PM »
Got any more of those pills, AC?

TH

(Who will take one, too....just cuz)
AIDS isn't for sissies.

Offline scotttt

  • Member
  • Posts: 146
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #31 on: March 21, 2007, 12:34:32 PM »
"We will deal with the Worried Ones in the Am I infected forums just fine.  It is ok to have a differing of opinion between the members here.  So lighten up just a hair on those with opposing views.  It will make this thread go alot better."

It is one thing to have an opposing viewpoint.  It is another to suggest that saliva is an infectious agent.  Come on!!!  Engaging in extremely unlikely "what if" scenarios that have never ever been shown to occur is the thing that WW nightmares are made of. 
« Last Edit: March 21, 2007, 12:37:16 PM by scotttt »

Offline thunter34

  • Member
  • Posts: 7,314
  • His name is Carl.
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #32 on: March 21, 2007, 12:35:47 PM »
Um...welcome back from your Time Out, scottttttttttttttttttttttttttttt.


So, AC....how 'bout those pills?
AIDS isn't for sissies.

Offline scotttt

  • Member
  • Posts: 146
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #33 on: March 21, 2007, 12:38:51 PM »
"Um...welcome back from your Time Out, scottttttttttttttttttttttttttttt."

My point is valid.  Get over it. :'(

Let's try sticking to the issues here.  No need to flame bait.  Suggesting that being uncut may result in getting HIV from getting a blow job suggests that saliva is an infectios agent which it is not.  Calling such assertions into question is merely correcting the dissemination of misinformation.  As I recall, one of the purposes of this website is to dispel myths not reinforce them. 

« Last Edit: March 21, 2007, 12:47:43 PM by scotttt »

Offline Moffie65

  • Member
  • Posts: 1,755
  • Living POZ since 1983
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #34 on: March 21, 2007, 12:44:34 PM »
Since when did saliva become an infectious agent?!?!?!?!.  Jeezus!!!!

Yes, you are correct, saliva is not an infectious agent.  Yes your "point" is valid, but only in the broadest of senses.  Beyond that, you are proving Keyites' statement about American Brash Mouths.

Have you never heard of bleeding gums?  Suction?  Unmerciful teeth?  Kinky Oral?  I'm sorry, the list goes on, ..........  and on   ............    and on.........

It is just too arrogant to say that oral is no risk!   I think I also stated the the human experience is far to diverse, and far too intricate, for us in our cushy United States, to dictate what is "correct" for the world and what isn't.  Our research is also far too corrupt for us to stand by some of it.  One needs to know the "true" history of this disease to really condemn anyone's views or science.  

Frankly, I am not the least bit worried about "worry warts", as you call them.  Not one iota!!!!!!!!!!

Love,
The Bible contains 6 admonishments to homosexuals,
and 362 to heterosexuals.
This doesn't mean that God doesn't love heterosexuals,
It's just that they need more supervision.
Lynn Lavne

Offline scotttt

  • Member
  • Posts: 146
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #35 on: March 21, 2007, 12:46:20 PM »
"Frankly, I am not the least bit worried about "worry warts", as you call them.  Not one iota!!!!!!!!!!"

WOW.  Sad.  You forget that we as human being are all connected.  Feeding into irrational myths about HIV transmission perpetuates ignorance and discrimination against those living with HIV. 

"Beyond that, you are proving Keyites' statement about American Brash Mouths."

Moffie, I am shocked.  This seems to be a very personal attack.  How very unkind of you. 
« Last Edit: March 21, 2007, 12:54:51 PM by scotttt »

Offline Moffie65

  • Member
  • Posts: 1,755
  • Living POZ since 1983
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #36 on: March 21, 2007, 12:53:52 PM »
scottttttttttttttttttttttttttt

Oh wise one, please tell me why I should give a damn about someone's imagination, when there are more people who are already infected that need help, than those that live in a fog of fear?

Please!
The Bible contains 6 admonishments to homosexuals,
and 362 to heterosexuals.
This doesn't mean that God doesn't love heterosexuals,
It's just that they need more supervision.
Lynn Lavne

Offline David_CA

  • Member
  • Posts: 3,246
  • Joined: March 2006
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #37 on: March 21, 2007, 12:58:24 PM »

Hence the name Milker, I suppose.  I will confess that there's something I find rather hot about that post.

Yup, same here.
Black Friday 03-03-2006
03-23-06 CD4 359 @27.4% VL 75,938
06-01-06 CD4 462 @24.3% VL > 100,000
08-15-06 CD4 388 @22.8% VL >  "
10-21-06 CD4 285 @21.9% VL >  "
  Atripla started 12-01-2006
01-08-07 CD4 429 @26.8% VL 1872!
05-08-07 CD4 478 @28.1% VL 740
08-03-07 CD4 509 @31.8% VL 370
11-06-07 CD4 570 @30.0% VL 140
02-21-08 CD4 648 @32.4% VL 600
05-19-08 CD4 695 @33.1% VL < 48 undetectable!
08-21-08 CD4 725 @34.5%
11-11-08 CD4 672 @39.5%
02-11-09 CD4 773 @36.8%
05-11-09 CD4 615 @36.2%
08-19-09 CD4 770 @38.5%
11-19-09 CD4 944 @33.7%
02-17-10 CD4 678 @39.9%  
06-03-10 CD4 768 @34.9%
09-21-10 CD4 685 @40.3%
01-10-11 CD4 908 @36.3%
05-23-11 CD4 846 @36.8% VL 80
02-13-12 CD4 911 @41.4% VL<20
You must be the change you want to see in the world.  Mahatma Gandhi

Offline keyite

  • Member
  • Posts: 514
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #38 on: March 21, 2007, 12:59:36 PM »
Moffie, Florida, Koi - thanks for your kind words and the concern you expressed. I don't actually think I'm particularly stuck on the HOW I was infected, at least not any more. What is done is done and think I am moving on, albeit with baby steps.

It's more that I now have great difficulty in assessing the risk involved in the future oral sex I'll hopefully have, knowing what I know about my own transmission route. Add to that the uncertainty of whether or not to disclose in oral-only scenarios. I'm absolutely determined that my virus will stay mine but what's ahead feels like a minefield.

The other part that makes moving on difficult is the absolute dismissal of oral sex as a transmission route amongst other pozzies so richly illustrated in this thread. The "I respect you and all, but there is NO WAY you could have been infected that way" just doesn't make me feel very respected - sorry. I'll need to grow some thicker skin.

Scottttt - for what it's worth (and I realise that ain't much): no, I don't suffer from selective amnesia either.

Finally, right from the beginning I interpreted Jack calling me a liar as tongue-in-cheek (and he's told me as much himself via PM)...

Offline scotttt

  • Member
  • Posts: 146
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #39 on: March 21, 2007, 01:02:50 PM »
"Oh wise one, please tell me why I should give a damn about someone's imagination, when there are more people who are already infected that need help, than those that live in a fog of fear?"

Moffie, when I am factually incorrect I welcome others to correct me.  I try not to take it personally.  We as human beings are often incorrect and there is nothing wrong with finding out one is factually wrong and correcting it.  It is how we grow both intellectually and emotionally.  While it is pleasant to be surrounded by yes men and women, it does very liittle for personal growth. 

To suggest that one is at risk for HIV infection as a result of coming into contact with saliva is incorrect.  Because this website is read by many people, it is our collective responsibility to correct blatantly incorrect information, especially when it involves HIV transmission.  To fail to do so is to negate our responsibility to the larger society. 


Offline thunter34

  • Member
  • Posts: 7,314
  • His name is Carl.
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #40 on: March 21, 2007, 01:05:24 PM »
"Um...welcome back from your Time Out, scottttttttttttttttttttttttttttt."

My point is valid.  Get over it. :'(

Let's try sticking to the issues here.  No need to flame bait.  Suggesting that being uncut may result in getting HIV from getting a blow job suggests that saliva is an infectios agent which it is not.  Calling such assertions into question is merely correcting the dissemination of misinformation.  As I recall, one of the purposes of this website is to dispel myths not reinforce them. 



I am over it....quite over it at this point.  I'm not trying to flamebait...I'm trying to help you by gently reminding you that this type of approach is what just recently got you into trouble here.  One of the purposes of this site is to dispel myths.  One of the requirements of this site is that we speak to one another civilly.  The tone you've taken has immediately edged what was a discussion into something more akin to an argument.  That kind of thing just isn't needed around here.
« Last Edit: March 21, 2007, 03:22:43 PM by thunter34 »
AIDS isn't for sissies.

Offline scotttt

  • Member
  • Posts: 146
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #41 on: March 21, 2007, 01:09:35 PM »
Thunter,

Let's stick to the issue.  It was suggested that saliva is an infectious agent.  It is not.  I merely corrected blatantly incorrect information. 

Should I get timed out for correcting irresponsibly incorrect information, I would be shocked.  I have addressed all concerned with kindness and respect.  I merely attacked the misinformation not the party disseminating it. 

Let's be grown up and not reduce this to bickering.  If you disagree with me on the issue at hand, let me know. You keep on harping on me personally.  I don't see how this is productive. I have not said anything rude to you.  I really cannot understand where this hostillity is coming from.  Your anger seems out of proportion in relation to what is being said here. Kindness costs nothing.

« Last Edit: March 21, 2007, 02:11:11 PM by scotttt »

Offline Moffie65

  • Member
  • Posts: 1,755
  • Living POZ since 1983
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #42 on: March 21, 2007, 01:11:24 PM »
Keyite,

Ahh, the future and it's attendant worries.  

Well, that is one of the hurdles that most of us have to deal with.  Finding balance is often more important than finding absolutes.  Unfortunately, our futures are full of uncertainty, and there is little we can do about that except take it as it comes.  (OK, small pun intended)

You can only gather input from us here and then plot your own course through future encounters.  I must say that for myself, I haven't always been protective of myself, or my partners, but that is my experience which places me out of the running as judge for anyone else.  With my current relationship, (19 years) he always knew I was positive, as I shared that the second day we knew each other.  Have we always been careful?  Not at all, but I should add, most of the time.  This decision is of such a personal nature, that you will find comfort somewhere in the mix, but it will be totally a decision that you will have to make.  

Welcome to the dichotomy that is HIV....

Love,
The Bible contains 6 admonishments to homosexuals,
and 362 to heterosexuals.
This doesn't mean that God doesn't love heterosexuals,
It's just that they need more supervision.
Lynn Lavne

Offline thunter34

  • Member
  • Posts: 7,314
  • His name is Carl.
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #43 on: March 21, 2007, 01:15:27 PM »
Thunter,

Let's stick to the issue.  It was suggested that saliva is an infectious agent.  It is not.  I merely corrected blatantly incorrect information. 


Suit yourself, scottttttttttttttttttttttttttttt.   Just trying to help.  This isn't my little tiff anyway.  It's yours.  Have at it.
AIDS isn't for sissies.

Offline scotttt

  • Member
  • Posts: 146
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #44 on: March 21, 2007, 01:24:47 PM »
Suit yourself, scottttttttttttttttttttttttttttt.   Just trying to help.

Not trying to fight, just trying to correct misinformation.

What I said is correct.  Saliva is not an infectious agent.  There are no cases of HIV transmission from receiving a blow job.  Not in the entire span of this pandemic yet ignorance and misinformation still persists.  It is our collective duty to stamp out misinformation.  Ignorance is dangerous.  For pointing out misinformation, I am not sorry.  For being upset by the further dissemination of misinformation I am not sorry.  If I make a factually incorrect statement about something of significant importance, such as the modes of transmission of an infectious disease during a pandemic, I would welcome the correction. 

Let's stick to the issues.   
« Last Edit: March 21, 2007, 01:26:23 PM by scotttt »

Offline thunter34

  • Member
  • Posts: 7,314
  • His name is Carl.
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #45 on: March 21, 2007, 01:26:45 PM »
Thunter,

Let's stick to the issue.  It was suggested that saliva is an infectious agent.  It is not.  I merely corrected blatantly incorrect information.  No need to get so huffy.  Getting a "time out" here impacts my life very little.  I managed to pick up the pieces when I had my time out.  Should I get timed out for correcting irresponsibly incorrect information, I would be shocked.  I have addressed all concerned with kindness and respect.  I merely attacked the misinformation not the party disseminating it. 

What I said is correct.  Saliva is not an infectious agent.  There are no cases of HIV transmission from receiving a blow job.  Not in the entire span of this pandemic yet ignorance and misinformation still persists.  It is our collective duty to stamp out misinformation.  Ignorance is dangerous.  For pointing out misinformation, I am not sorry.  For being upset by the further dissemination of misinformation I am not sorry.  If I make a factually incorrect statement about something of significant importance, such as the modes of transmission of an infectious disease during a pandemic, I would welcome the correction. 

Let's stick to the issues.   

I'm not the least bit huffy, sweetness and light.  You've since updated and vastly expounded on your post to me, but my answer remains the same:

I was just trying to help you with a gentle reminder.  This is your little tiff here, not mine.  Have at it.

kthxbye!
« Last Edit: March 21, 2007, 03:20:55 PM by thunter34 »
AIDS isn't for sissies.

Offline Moffie65

  • Member
  • Posts: 1,755
  • Living POZ since 1983
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #46 on: March 21, 2007, 01:35:09 PM »
For the record Scott,

Infection via saliva was not stated, nor implied in post #25.  Saliva didn't become part of the conversation until you stated it, when I gave you that point in post #34. 

I think Keyite got my meaning and my intent in sharing my personal experience here.

Love,

The Bible contains 6 admonishments to homosexuals,
and 362 to heterosexuals.
This doesn't mean that God doesn't love heterosexuals,
It's just that they need more supervision.
Lynn Lavne

Offline scotttt

  • Member
  • Posts: 146
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #47 on: March 21, 2007, 01:35:28 PM »
Thunter,

Let's stick to the issue.  It was suggested that one can become infected with HIV from receiving a blow job.  This suggests that saliva is an infectious agent.  In the entire course of the pandemic, there is not one documented case of a person getting HIV by receiving a blow job.  To suggest that saliva is an infectous agent in this day and age is highly irresponsible.

That is the issue.

Offline BKNYLivin

  • Member
  • Posts: 76
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #48 on: March 21, 2007, 01:39:00 PM »
Very interesting topic - I know one or two people who also claim to have been infected through oral sex(giving bjs).
edited 'coz I mistakenly hit enter

I don't see how anyone can totally dismiss this as a possibility, scientific evidence or not. There are quite a few people walking around with all kinds of STDs in their mouths/throats - wouldn't that increase the risk of contracting HIV if they took a load or two?
Just a thought
« Last Edit: March 21, 2007, 01:42:08 PM by BKNYLivin »
Diagnosed 9/18/06
10/13/06 - CD4:449, 33%,  VL:>500,000
11/20/06 - CD4: 392  VL:425,000
02/08/07 - CD4: 361, 16.9% VL:133,000
02/13/07 - Started HAART: Atripla
03/08/07 - CD4:401, 23.8% VL:643
06/05/07 - CD4:614, 33.6% VL:225
09/14/07 - CD4:612, 37%  VL: <50
12/14/07 - CD4:582, 38.5% VL:<50
4/11/08 - CD4: 658, VL: <50
3/5/09 - CD4: 847, 49% VL: <50
7/29/09 - CD4: 965, 50.1% VL: <50
12/28/09 - CD4: 925, 49.2% vl <50
9/16/10 - CD4: 1011 vl: <50

Offline thunter34

  • Member
  • Posts: 7,314
  • His name is Carl.
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #49 on: March 21, 2007, 01:44:49 PM »
Thunter,

Let's stick to the issue.  It was suggested that one can become infected with HIV from receiving a blow job.  This suggests that saliva is an infectious agent.  In the entire course of the pandemic, there is not one documented case of a person getting HIV by receiving a blow job.  To suggest that saliva is an infectous agent in this day and age is highly irresponsible.

That is the issue.

Girl, what is wrong with you??  Why are you still going on with me?  I already said (twice) above that I was only trying to give you a gentle caution against this very type of thing you're doing here....being confrontational with people and going on and on and on.  You have a richly illustrated history on here of being unable to "just drop it".  Like you are doing right here right now with me.  You can say what you want about cum, about saliva, about blowjobs...Hey, I'm a fan of all three.  

Forget I said anything to begin with.  Go ahead and say whatever you want to say.  It matters not.
AIDS isn't for sissies.

Offline scotttt

  • Member
  • Posts: 146
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #50 on: March 21, 2007, 01:47:42 PM »
Infection via saliva was not stated, nor implied in post #25.  Saliva didn't become part of the conversation until you stated it, when I gave you that point in post #34.

You mentioned the possibility of getting infected by receiving a blowjob if one not circumcised.  Saliva is the bodily fluid that the mouth contains.  Within saliva there can be small amounts of blood, but saliva as such is  not an infectious agent. 

In light of the fact that there as not been one documented case of HIV transmission from receiving oral sex, you still asserted the possibility.

Many things can happen in theory.   Ann and the others have repeatedly dispelled such transmission misconceptions routinely in the "Am I Infected" section.  She and the other moderators have strongly asserted that getting HIV from receiving oral sex is not a real world risk.  One of the arguments she and the others have made is that saliva is not an infectious agent. 

To suggest that one is at risk of becoming infected with HIV by receiving a blowjob seems a bit over the top. Expounding on such "what if "scenarios when it comes to something as serious as HIV transmission seems to be highly irresponsible given how much paranoia about the transmission of this disease has been used to justify discrimination against HIV positive people.



Offline scotttt

  • Member
  • Posts: 146
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #51 on: March 21, 2007, 01:51:58 PM »
"Girl, what is wrong with you??  Why are you still going on with me? "

Thunter, please, let's stick to the issue.  You keep directing this thread to me rather than to the subject at hand. 

I however continue to talk about the issue at hand.   Please, let us stick to the topic and don't hijack this thread with your personal attack on me.  Let's be grown ups here please.  I say we just stop this bickering and stick to the more important issues at hand. 

The issue is whether or not there is a risk of getting infected with HIV from receiving oral sex. 
« Last Edit: March 21, 2007, 02:04:49 PM by scotttt »

Offline thunter34

  • Member
  • Posts: 7,314
  • His name is Carl.
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #52 on: March 21, 2007, 02:00:32 PM »
In the interest of the peace, I respectfully and completely withdraw from this thread. 


Edited to remove a funny but probably unhelpful picture.
« Last Edit: March 21, 2007, 02:02:57 PM by thunter34 »
AIDS isn't for sissies.

Offline ACinKC

  • Member
  • Posts: 2,994
  • Bring it VIRUS! #2 Ranked In-crowd Member!
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #53 on: March 21, 2007, 02:02:58 PM »
I said this wasnt going to end well.


And thunter... what pills?  You lost me!
LIFE is not a race to the grave with the intention of arriving safely
in a pretty and well-preserved body, but, rather to skid in broadside,
thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming--WOW! WHAT A
RIDE!!!

Offline scotttt

  • Member
  • Posts: 146
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #54 on: March 21, 2007, 02:03:16 PM »
Thunter,

Thank you. 

Peace

Scott

Offline milker

  • Member
  • Posts: 4,034
  • Protected phone sex
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #55 on: March 21, 2007, 02:03:31 PM »

Hence the name Milker, I suppose.  I will confess that there's something I find rather hot about that post.

Yup, hence the name Milker  ;D ;D ;D
Calm down, calm down lol
mid-dec: stupid ass
mid-jan: seroconversion
mid-feb: poz
mar 07: cd4 432 (35%) vl 54000
may 07: cd4 399 (28%) vl 27760
jul 07: cd4 403 (26%) vl 99241
oct 07: cd4 353 (24%) vl 29993
jan 08: cd4 332 (26%) vl 33308
mar 08: cd4 392 (23%) vl 75548
jun 08: cd4 325 (27%) vl 45880
oct 08: cd4 197 (20%) vl 154000 <== aids diagnosis
nov 2 08 start Atripla
nov 30 08: cd4 478 (23%) vl 1880 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
feb 19 09: cd4 398 (24%) vl 430 getting there!
apr 23 09: cd4 604 (29%) vl 50 woohoo :D :D
jul 30 09: cd4 512 (29%) vl undetectable :D :D
may 27 10: cd4 655 (32%) vl undetectable :D :D

Now accepting applications from blowjob ninjas™

Offline thunter34

  • Member
  • Posts: 7,314
  • His name is Carl.
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #56 on: March 21, 2007, 02:05:56 PM »
I said this wasnt going to end well.


And thunter... what pills?  You lost me!

Dammit!  You and Matty are messing me up!  That was his picture above:  Chill Pills.


EDITED FOR:  OK...NOW I withdraw from this thread so I can stop getting all these posts hurled at me.
AIDS isn't for sissies.

Offline ACinKC

  • Member
  • Posts: 2,994
  • Bring it VIRUS! #2 Ranked In-crowd Member!
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #57 on: March 21, 2007, 02:07:10 PM »
Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhh gotcha.  He is the official "dealer" of those.  No way id be caught selling on his turf!
LIFE is not a race to the grave with the intention of arriving safely
in a pretty and well-preserved body, but, rather to skid in broadside,
thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming--WOW! WHAT A
RIDE!!!

Offline scotttt

  • Member
  • Posts: 146
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #58 on: March 21, 2007, 02:12:20 PM »
Thunter,

Thanks again ;)

Offline Florida69

  • Member
  • Posts: 428
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #59 on: March 21, 2007, 02:21:33 PM »
Well, in offering some support for the newly virally enhanced here is some scientific proof:


http://www.brown.edu/Student_Services/Health_Services/Health_Education/sexual_health/sti/oralsex.htm
For the person receiving oral sex, there's little chance of contracting HIV, although it's difficult to pinpoint when HIV has been transmitted because people rarely engage in only one type of sexual activity. In the case of fellatio (oral sex on a man), the HIV virus theoretically could gain entry from the mouth to the opening on the tip of the penis, or through an open cut or lesion on the penis. If you receive oral sex, however, you mainly expose yourself to saliva, which has negligible concentrations of HIV.
For the cunnilingus (oral sex on a woman) recipient, the chance of HIV transmission is also low, although the entire vagina is a mucous membrane through which, theoretically, the virus can be transmitted. A woman receiving cunnilingus is more at risk of getting herpes or gonorrhea from her partner than HIV.
The risk of HIV infection is greater for the partner who performs oral sex. A person performing oral sex on a woman should avoid it during her period, for menstrual blood can carry the HIV virus. Research presented at the 7th Conference on Retroviruses and Opportunistic Infections in February of 2000 concluded that 8 of 122 cases in an HIV-transmission study were possibly attributable to performing oral sex on a man. Of these 8 infected people, some reported having had recent dental work or having cuts in their mouths, suggesting that HIV transmission by oral sex is associated with cuts, lesions, or irritation of the tissues in the mouth.
Recent studies show that 26% of sexually active teenagers think it’s impossible to get HIV through oral sex, and 15% more don't know whether people can contract HIV this way. The truth: it is possible. (Source: CDC)
http://www.coolnurse.com/aids.htm
"Safe Sex" = using latex condoms with every act of sex.
Use dental or vaginal dams with every act of oral sex. Use a latex condom every time you perform oral-penile sex (fellatio).
Use plastic food wrap, a latex condom cut open, or a dental dam when performing oral-vaginal sex (cunnilingus) or oral-anal sex (anilingus) (source: CDC). Use a condom every time you have anal sex.
These methods provide a physical barrier to HIV transmission and will also help keep you safe from other sexually transmitted diseases (STDs), many of which can increase your risk of contracting HIV or giving it to someone else.
http://www.stanford.edu/group/SHPRC/ch4_ora.html
HIV can be passed through unprotected oral sex, but it is more likely to be passed during unprotected penetrative sex. The infected semen/precum or vaginal fluid must enter the body through a cut or sore in the mouth or esophagus. The virus is unlikely to be passed from a person’s mouth to another person’s genitals.
http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn1156
The results support other research showing that oral sex is a low-risk activity for transmitting HIV, and that saliva has anti-HIV properties. However, several cases have been reported which suggest that oral sex can result in HIV transmission, so the latest findings must be interpreted cautiously, experts say.
"Low risk is not the same as no risk," says Ronald Valdiserri, deputy director of the Center for Disease Control's National Center for HIV, STD and TB Prevention. "We do know that it is possible to become infected with HIV after oral sex."
http://www.uhs.uga.edu/sexualhealth/oral_sex.html
Is Oral Sex Safe?
Some individuals consider oral sex to be a safe or no risk sexual practice. Many people feel safe engaging in this behavior because there is no risk of pregnancy. There are, however, other considerations. Many sexually transmitted infections (STIs) such as gonorrhea, herpes, hepatitis B, HIV, and syphilis can be transmitted through oral-genital contact. The risk of contracting chlamydia and HPV through oral sex is much less, although possible. It is difficult to determine exact rates of transmission of STIs through oral sex since many sexually active individuals practice oral sex in addition to other, higher risk activities, such as vaginal and/or anal sex. In addition, if a male ejaculates during oral sex, then the risk to his partner becomes higher.
HIV
HIV may be transmitted through oral-genital contact when HIV in semen, vaginal secretions or blood enters the mucous membranes or abrasions in the mouth and throat. Saliva is not responsible for transmitting HIV. Deep mouth-to-mouth kissing is not a risky behavior for HIV unless blood is present in the mouth (i.e. from sores, dental procedures, flossing, brushing, etc.).
The risk of HIV transmission from an infected partner through oral sex is much smaller than the risk of HIV transmission from anal or vaginal sex, but there is still a risk.5 Several co-factors can increase the risk of HIV transmission through oral sex, including: oral ulcers, bleeding gums, genital sores, and the presence of other STIs.
The Options Project found that 7.8% (8 of 102) of recently infected men who have sex with men in San Francisco were probably infected through oral sex. Most of these men believed that the risk was minimal or non-existent. Nearly half (3 of 8) of these cases reported oral problems, including occasional bleeding gums. Almost all (7 of 8) of these men reported oral contact with pre-ejaculate or semen.6 More recent studies have placed the risk at a much lower rate, .06% for oral-penile contact with an HIV-positive partner and .04% with partners of unknown status.5
When scientists describe the risk of transmitting an infectious disease, like HIV, the term "theoretical risk" is often used. Very simply, "theoretical risk" means that passing an infection from one person to another is possible, even though there may not yet be any actual documented cases. "Theoretical risk" is not the same as "likelihood". In other words, stating that HIV infection is "theoretically possible" does not necessarily mean it is likely to happen—only that it might. Documented risk, on the other hand, is used to describe transmission that has actually occurred, been investigated, and documented in the scientific literature.
For HIV, there have been documented cases of HIV being transmitted to a receptive partner through oral-penile contact, even in cases when the insertive partner didn't ejaculate. Likewise, there have been a few cases of HIV transmission most likely resulting from oral-vaginal sex. As of December 2000, there has only been one published case of HIV transmission associated with oral-anal contact,7 though other studies have shown that oral-anal contact is a marker for other high risk behaviors.
Lane, T. & Palacio, H. (December, 2003). Safe Sex methods HIV InSight Knowledge Base Chapter. Retrieved January 5, 2004, from www.hivinsite.org/InSite.jsp?page=kb-07-02-02


Bro, hang in there, it does get easier.  Sometimes you have to fight ignorance with tolerance and back it up with some science...  I wish you the best, take care.......................... D



Nothing in the world can take the place of Persistence. Talent will not; nothing is more common than unsuccessful men with talent. Genius will not; unrewarded genius is almost a proverb. Education will not; the world is full of educated derelicts. Persistence and determination alone are omnipotent. The slogan 'Press On' has solved and always will solve the problems of the human race.
Calvin Coolidge

Offline jack

  • Member
  • Posts: 1,578
  • fomerly the loser known as Jake
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #60 on: March 21, 2007, 02:38:09 PM »
1. I was joking calling the author an idiot and pM'ed him.
2. Surveys are not science. Science is testing in a controlled atmosphere where there can be no question as to the results. Results from questionaires should not be considered science.
3.I respect everyone's right to perform oral sex, but if I was negative I sure wouldn't be performing any oral sex without protection, which means its not worth doing at all. Thats just my opinion.
4.Being HIV+ is not some badge of honor or joke, it can destroy your life as well as the lives of those you love. The guilt of the damage you have done or might do to others is a far greater weight than anything you suffer personally. Thats just me. I dont have sex anymore,but I sure think about it a lot.

Offline Matty the Damned

  • Member
  • Posts: 12,228
  • Ninja Please
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #61 on: March 21, 2007, 03:02:43 PM »
1. I was joking calling the author an idiot and pM'ed him.
2. Surveys are not science. Science is testing in a controlled atmosphere where there can be no question as to the results. Results from questionaires should not be considered science.
3.I respect everyone's right to perform oral sex, but if I was negative I sure wouldn't be performing any oral sex without protection, which means its not worth doing at all. Thats just my opinion.
4.Being HIV+ is not some badge of honor or joke, it can destroy your life as well as the lives of those you love. The guilt of the damage you have done or might do to others is a far greater weight than anything you suffer personally. Thats just me. I dont have sex anymore,but I sure think about it a lot.


Oh Jakey. You so craaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaazzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzyyyyyyyyyyyy. :-*

MtD

Offline Florida69

  • Member
  • Posts: 428
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #62 on: March 21, 2007, 03:02:57 PM »
2. Surveys are not science. Science is testing in a controlled atmosphere where there can be no question as to the results. Results from questionaires should not be considered science.
4.Being HIV+ is not some badge of honor or joke, it can destroy your life as well as the lives of those you love. The guilt of the damage you have done or might do to others is a far greater weight than anything you suffer personally. Thats just me. I dont have sex anymore,but I sure think about it a lot.

Please feel free to check any sources that you negate, as they are backed up by the United States Centers for Disease Control or University Studies such as Brown and Stanford, and I am only posting here to offer support not to make somone feel badly for how they were infected or the burden they are carrying being newly diagnoised.  I would never post something that I did not believe to be true.  I really don't think anyone wears HIV as a badge or joke, it is a very serious condition, and should be taken that way.  With that said, sometimes in life you have to embrace the good and move past the bad otherwise it will consume you and make what is left of your life full of strife.  Enjoy today for tomorrow may not come.  Good luck.................. D
Nothing in the world can take the place of Persistence. Talent will not; nothing is more common than unsuccessful men with talent. Genius will not; unrewarded genius is almost a proverb. Education will not; the world is full of educated derelicts. Persistence and determination alone are omnipotent. The slogan 'Press On' has solved and always will solve the problems of the human race.
Calvin Coolidge

Offline Andy Velez

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • Posts: 24,686
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #63 on: March 21, 2007, 03:05:47 PM »
Dear All,

Jack PM'd me as well to say his use of "liar" was meant ironically. I am sure it's true. No matter what we may agree or not on, I have never doubted Jack's integrity. I did caution him that the use of irony can be missplaced in the Forums, especially when the topic generates as much heat amongst members as this one has.

Thanks for the clarification, Jack.

Cheers,
Andy Velez

Offline aupointillimite

  • Member
  • Posts: 3,229
  • FUS DO RAH!
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #64 on: March 21, 2007, 03:09:16 PM »
Oh yeah... you use irony on this forum at your own risk.

Take it from one who knows.
Your tastebuds can't repel flavor of this magnitude!

Offline Val

  • Member
  • Posts: 938
  • Praxitèles -- Satyre au repos
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #65 on: March 21, 2007, 04:56:28 PM »
Same thing here.  When I'm replying to topics such as this one, I make sure I read twice what I type...  No irony!

I happen to know two guys who affirm they have been infected by just giving blow jobs.  Should I doubt their sincerity, or should I just thinking they are naive?
Tough question, if you ask me.
I have a tendency in trusting people --- not judge them!  And I believe in what  Keyite says.

Val
___
___
Arthus Bertrand
http://www.yannarthusbertrand.com/yann2/affichage.php?reference=TVDC%20YABFR084&pais=France
Ali Mahdavi
http://asyoudesireme.online.fr/index.htm
Richard de Chazal
http://www.richarddechazal.com/
Daniel Nassoy
http://www.danielnassoy.com/pages/galeries_portraits_2.html
Photography:
The word comes from the Greek words φως phos ("light"), and γραφίς graphis ("stylus", "paintbrush") or γραφή graphê, together meaning "drawing with light" or "representation by means of lines".

Offline Longislander

  • Member
  • Posts: 2,486
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #66 on: March 21, 2007, 05:46:06 PM »
 I have no doubt that what Keyite says about his infection is true. I know when I seroconverted, and it traced back to the one and only encounter I had in the prior 90 days, and the encounter was 4 weeks back.

The first quote Florida69 posted makes a lot of sense. Especially about the part where the sex act doesn't always end with just a one-sided blow job.

 I know how I was likely infected, attempted anal receiving, ejaculation on lower back followed. I can only guess some splattered into the slightly battered anal entry~ Anythings possible.

I was under the impression, and may be quite wrong about this, that the + persons VL was a contributing factor in the likelihood of infecting someone else. In my case, since the guy didn't know and was likely recently infected, his VL was probably pretty high. I'm wondering, during all the scientific studies, surveys, etc, and the serodiscordent couples involved, was the + partner undetectable due to meds?

Keyite, I believe you. I'm not saying it's high risk, but I won't believe the answer is no risk.
infected 10/05 diagnosed 12-05
2/06   379/57000                    6/07 372/30500 25%   4/09 640/U/32% 
5/06   ?? /37000                     8/07 491/55000/24%    9/09 913/U/39%
8/06   349/9500 25%              11/07 515/68000/24     2/10 845/U/38%
9/06   507/16,000 30% !          2/08  516/116k/22%    7/10 906/80/39%
12/06 398/29000 26%             Start Atripla 3/08
3/07   402/80,000 29%            4/08  485/undet!/27
4/07   507/35,000 25%            7/08 625/UD/34%
                                                 11/08 684/U/36%

Offline aupointillimite

  • Member
  • Posts: 3,229
  • FUS DO RAH!
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #67 on: March 21, 2007, 05:47:18 PM »
Same thing here.  When I'm replying to topics such as this one, I make sure I read twice what I type...  No irony!

I happen to know two guys who affirm they have been infected by just giving blow jobs.  Should I doubt their sincerity, or should I just thinking they are naive?
Tough question, if you ask me.
I have a tendency in trusting people --- not judge them!  And I believe in what  Keyite says.

Val
___
___

One must, I feel, use a certain amount of logic, experience, science, and "what the hell do I get out of this?" when it comes to discussing those who swear up and down that they were infected via oral sex.

1.  I have not infected a negatron via oral sex or any other sex for that matter.  Of course, I don't ejaculate into their mouths, and this has been discussed beforehand.  I also had a lot of unprotected oral sex, with negative HIV results for years.  Unprotected buttsex?  Oops.

2.  No one has, to my knowledge, been able to follow someone around for all of their sexual exploits to see exactly what they've been up to.

3.  Furthermore, no one has, to my knowledge, been able to pinpoint with exact and complete certainty the exact moment in sexual play that one caught their own virus.  Was it during the oral?  Was it during the vaginal?  Was it during the anal?  You don't know.

4.  There are certain facts we know about infectious fluids and non-infectious fluids.  We also know that saliva contains an inhibiting agent... now, I am not a scientist... however... given the incredible complexity of the relationship between multi-cellular biological organisms and viruses, I would view the statement "human saliva kills HIV" as the truth but one in with potential loopholes.  Perhaps one person's doesn't inhibit as much, perhaps they had brushed their teeth recently... or maybe they're lying.  Who can say?  No one can.

5.  Given all the potential circumstances that go into HIV transmission, I don't see the purpose in taking anyone to task when they mention how they believe they were infected.  What exactly do you get out of it?  If they sincerely believe they're telling the truth, then you come off as kind of an ass.  If they're lying... then they're lying... yay.  It's a rather silly thing to lie about.   

I know teh Internets are serious fucking business, but in light of the unknowns, I think one might profitably mind one's own business when it comes to this subject.
Your tastebuds can't repel flavor of this magnitude!

Offline jkinatl2

  • Member
  • Posts: 6,007
  • Doo. Dah. Dipp-ity.
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #68 on: March 21, 2007, 05:53:20 PM »
The plural of anecdote is not data.

And this thread is not the place for a scientific discussion of oral sex and first tier peer review. I for sure am NOT going to further alienate myself from this site by starting yet another, ultimately pointless oral sex thread in the LIVING WITH forum. I stand firmly behind my research, and the efficacy of the assertions I have made. That having been said, I welcome the new member, and in THIS forum, it is absolutely irrelevant HOW someone became infected - except that silence is construed by many who lurk as complicity.

Something I have no trouble countering in the AM I INFECTED area of the forum.

Not here, in what I assume to be a support forum first, and an information forum second.



"Many people, especially in the gay community, turn to oral sex as a safer alternative in the age of AIDS. And with HIV rates rising, people need to remember that oral sex is safer sex. It's a reasonable alternative."

-Kimberly Page-Shafer, PhD, MPH

Welcome Thread

Offline Longislander

  • Member
  • Posts: 2,486
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #69 on: March 21, 2007, 05:59:30 PM »
Keyite's been a member since September of 2006
infected 10/05 diagnosed 12-05
2/06   379/57000                    6/07 372/30500 25%   4/09 640/U/32% 
5/06   ?? /37000                     8/07 491/55000/24%    9/09 913/U/39%
8/06   349/9500 25%              11/07 515/68000/24     2/10 845/U/38%
9/06   507/16,000 30% !          2/08  516/116k/22%    7/10 906/80/39%
12/06 398/29000 26%             Start Atripla 3/08
3/07   402/80,000 29%            4/08  485/undet!/27
4/07   507/35,000 25%            7/08 625/UD/34%
                                                 11/08 684/U/36%

Offline jkinatl2

  • Member
  • Posts: 6,007
  • Doo. Dah. Dipp-ity.
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #70 on: March 21, 2007, 06:04:48 PM »
I stand corrected, LongIslander.

"Many people, especially in the gay community, turn to oral sex as a safer alternative in the age of AIDS. And with HIV rates rising, people need to remember that oral sex is safer sex. It's a reasonable alternative."

-Kimberly Page-Shafer, PhD, MPH

Welcome Thread

Offline keyite

  • Member
  • Posts: 514
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #71 on: March 21, 2007, 06:06:55 PM »
Keyite's been a member since September of 2006

I have indeed but, like friends, one can't have too many welcomes...  ;)

Offline aupointillimite

  • Member
  • Posts: 3,229
  • FUS DO RAH!
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #72 on: March 21, 2007, 06:08:34 PM »
The plural of anecdote is not data.

It's "Internets."

I just made that up.  And you may quote me wildly on it.
Your tastebuds can't repel flavor of this magnitude!

Offline Matty the Damned

  • Member
  • Posts: 12,228
  • Ninja Please
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #73 on: March 21, 2007, 07:36:47 PM »
I do not now nor have I ever seen any evidence that HIV has been transmitted via oral sex. I do not accept that the virus is transmitted in that way.

I have no doubt that Keyite is quite genuine in his belief that this is how he contracted the virus. Just because his belief is genuine, doesn't mean it's correct. As was noted earlier there are other factors at play in this case.

The unprotected anal sex, for instance.

MtD

Offline keyite

  • Member
  • Posts: 514
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #74 on: March 21, 2007, 07:50:22 PM »
As was noted earlier there are other factors at play in this case.

The unprotected anal sex, for instance.

Yes, I have had unprotected anal sex - long enough ago, and with enough negative test results in between to know I could not have been infected that way.

Offline Matty the Damned

  • Member
  • Posts: 12,228
  • Ninja Please
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #75 on: March 21, 2007, 07:56:35 PM »
Ah.

Point taken Keyite. Jakey's hamfisted attempt at irony must have distracted Matty the Damned from reading the fine print.

Nevertheless, I'm not convinced about oral sex as a mode of transmission.

I would ask one question, does it actually matter how you got the QueerPlague? I mean, it's all a bit late to fuss about this now.

MtD

Offline keyite

  • Member
  • Posts: 514
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #76 on: March 21, 2007, 08:14:52 PM »
I would ask one question, does it actually matter how you got the QueerPlague? I mean, it's all a bit late to fuss about this now.

Matty, please have a look at my reply #38 above. My original post wasn't actually intended to convey that I'm singularly stuck on HOW I got infected - I'm more concerned with the resulting contradictions and dilemmas I seem to face in moving forward. I could perhaps have made that clearer.

Offline koi1

  • Member
  • Posts: 713
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #77 on: March 21, 2007, 08:31:58 PM »
I think what is confusing is the follwoing statemet you made.:

"I have had unprotected anal sex in the past and I could just as well have been infected that way "

You are entitled to your opinion, however people are just pointing out that no credible, documented, proven, case has ever been shown in terms of getting it by receiving oral sex. In studies people have also recanted their stories by later "confessing" that they also had unprotected anal sex. Look up the UCSF serodiscorant study.

People do not need to call you a liar. That was uncalled for. What matters is ultimately what you believe, and you are entitled to that. I just don't know you are going to have a lot of success convincing very many people that it is a risk to be taken seriously, when many are already curtailing their sexual activity. What's next? Full body Condoms? Why bother with sex then? Somebody shoot me before I go insane. By the way, don't reheat food in styrofoam containers, it causes cancer.

rob
diagnosed on 11/20/06 viral load 23,000  cd4 97    8%
01/04/07 six weeks after diagnosis vl 53,000 cd4 cd4 70    6%
Began sustiva truvada 01/04/07
newest labs  drawn on 01/15/07  vl 1,100    cd4 119    7%
Drawn 02/10/07
cd4=160 viral load= 131 percentage= 8%
New labs 3/10/07 (two months on sustiva truvada
cd4 count 292  percentage 14 viral load undetectable

Offline Matty the Damned

  • Member
  • Posts: 12,228
  • Ninja Please
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #78 on: March 21, 2007, 08:55:55 PM »
Matty, please have a look at my reply #38 above.

Key,

I re-read that and I have to tell you that Rob (Koi) is on the money. There is no credible evidence which establishes oral sex (receptive, insertive or otherwise) as a way to transmit HIV. None, nada, zip, zilch, bupkis. You don't need to be confuzzled about "the way forward" on this issue any longer.

MtD

Offline Longislander

  • Member
  • Posts: 2,486
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #79 on: March 21, 2007, 10:13:05 PM »
I wonder if all the people who ran the studies and asked the survey questions, dismissed everyone who claimed oral sex as their transmission route just as easily as Keyite is being dismissed as somewhat delusional.

Key, I don't think you'll get anyone to believe. As has been pointed out, there are big reasons why no one wants to believe it possible.
infected 10/05 diagnosed 12-05
2/06   379/57000                    6/07 372/30500 25%   4/09 640/U/32% 
5/06   ?? /37000                     8/07 491/55000/24%    9/09 913/U/39%
8/06   349/9500 25%              11/07 515/68000/24     2/10 845/U/38%
9/06   507/16,000 30% !          2/08  516/116k/22%    7/10 906/80/39%
12/06 398/29000 26%             Start Atripla 3/08
3/07   402/80,000 29%            4/08  485/undet!/27
4/07   507/35,000 25%            7/08 625/UD/34%
                                                 11/08 684/U/36%

Offline jkinatl2

  • Member
  • Posts: 6,007
  • Doo. Dah. Dipp-ity.
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #80 on: March 21, 2007, 10:39:21 PM »
I wonder if all the people who ran the studies and asked the survey questions, dismissed everyone who claimed oral sex as their transmission route just as easily as Keyite is being dismissed as somewhat delusional.

Key, I don't think you'll get anyone to believe. As has been pointed out, there are big reasons why no one wants to believe it possible.

First off, I find your insinuation repugnant.

Secondly, had you bothered to review the Page-Shafer and Romero studies, you would have discovered that post- infection interview was not an issue. No one HAD to lie or misrepresent, because there were NO infections. Not in twenty-plus accumulated years of monitoring between the two studies.

Post-infection patient survey is exceedingly unreliable, but until the advent of HAART, there were NO serodiscordant couples remaining sexually active long enough to compile and follow. We were, at best, extrapolating from the softest science (patient report) and presenting it as hard data. While I understand that position from a "better safe than sorry"  aspect, it's simply not anywhere close to the quantifiability of the serodiscordant studies.

A vested interest? Sure, because once you postulate that exposure to saliva can infect, you transition HIV from an infectious agent to a communicable one. With all the stigma and isolation that such an event presupposes.

I get so frustrated sometimes, because the science is THERE. Its OBVIOUS. And frighteningly few seem to bother to look at it.

It is obvious with simian and primate studies, with long term monitoring, with epidemiology in the heterosexual community as well as the gay community.

It's obvious with the lack of documented cunnilingus transmission, with the lack of casual contact transmission, with the long-term serodiscordant studies, and with the biological evidence of the mechanisms for HIv infection: to wit, the necessity for HIV to contact specific lymph cells and dendritic cells, which are almost utterly absent from the oral cavity.

The dozen or so proteins and enzymes in saliva which inhibit HIV (at least two of which have been synthesized and used in Astroglide lubricant).

As people with HIV, we have not only an opportunity, but a DUTY to understand our infection and the transmission vectors. Otherwise, we should not be shocked when our families and friends withdraw, when we are given plastic forks at Thanksgiving, when our hands are not held when we die.

THAT is the vested interest, Longislander. Not the search for sexual gratification.

Again, I apologize for participating here. I respectfully withdraw.

"Many people, especially in the gay community, turn to oral sex as a safer alternative in the age of AIDS. And with HIV rates rising, people need to remember that oral sex is safer sex. It's a reasonable alternative."

-Kimberly Page-Shafer, PhD, MPH

Welcome Thread

Offline Longislander

  • Member
  • Posts: 2,486
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #81 on: March 21, 2007, 11:37:55 PM »
Quote
First off, I find your insinuation repugnant.

I'm sure you do. I find your insinuation that Keyite has no business asking this question in THIS forum just plain rude.

Quote
Secondly, had you bothered to review the Page-Shafer and Romero studies, you ...

If I had as much time on my hands as you do, I just may have read it.
Quote
once you postulate that exposure to saliva can infect,

I think you've read way too much into anything I've said.

Quote
we should not be shocked when our families and friends withdraw, when we are given plastic forks at Thanksgiving, when our hands are not held when we die.

...when someone we know tests positive from oral sex...

Quote
Again, I apologize for participating here. I respectfully withdraw

This is happening often...

You're correct, everyone else is dead wrong.
There are no maybe's.
infected 10/05 diagnosed 12-05
2/06   379/57000                    6/07 372/30500 25%   4/09 640/U/32% 
5/06   ?? /37000                     8/07 491/55000/24%    9/09 913/U/39%
8/06   349/9500 25%              11/07 515/68000/24     2/10 845/U/38%
9/06   507/16,000 30% !          2/08  516/116k/22%    7/10 906/80/39%
12/06 398/29000 26%             Start Atripla 3/08
3/07   402/80,000 29%            4/08  485/undet!/27
4/07   507/35,000 25%            7/08 625/UD/34%
                                                 11/08 684/U/36%

Offline scotttt

  • Member
  • Posts: 146
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #82 on: March 21, 2007, 11:47:15 PM »
Well said Jonathan!

Offline Miss Philicia

  • Member
  • Posts: 24,064
  • celebrity poster, faker & poser
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #83 on: March 21, 2007, 11:53:07 PM »
*sigh*
"I’ve slept with enough men to know that I’m not gay"

Offline thunter34

  • Member
  • Posts: 7,314
  • His name is Carl.
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #84 on: March 21, 2007, 11:56:29 PM »
Paul, that crack about "If I had as much time on my hands as you do" is NOT cool.

Perhaps I'm reading too much into it, but it rubbed me the wrong way altogether.


(I know I said I'd stay out of this thread already.  Mea Culpa.)


PS-  This thread is cursed or something.
AIDS isn't for sissies.

Offline Dachshund

  • Member
  • Posts: 5,956
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #85 on: March 21, 2007, 11:57:46 PM »
If I had as much time on my hands as you do, I just may have read it.


 I hope you are just trying to be "ironic" but what an unnecessary cheap shot.



edited to add: I hope if you ever find yourself on disabilty you will find a little more support and understanding than you exhibit.
« Last Edit: March 22, 2007, 12:08:10 AM by Dachshund »

Offline scotttt

  • Member
  • Posts: 146
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #86 on: March 21, 2007, 11:59:59 PM »
"(I know I said I'd stay out of this thread already.  Mea Culpa.)"
 ;)

Offline Matty the Damned

  • Member
  • Posts: 12,228
  • Ninja Please
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #87 on: March 22, 2007, 12:07:20 AM »
I'm sure you do. I find your insinuation that Keyite has no business asking this question in THIS forum just plain rude.

At no time did anyone insinuate that Key had no business asking his question, Paul. We all accept that he has every right to ask his question and JK (who is more qualified to answer these sorts of questions than any of us) answered it.

Patiently and politely.

Not only that, JK's answer (as always) is supported by the highest standard of evidence. A standard that has made these forums the leading HIV/AIDS website.

Sometimes there are right and wrong answers to questions, Paul. This is one of those occasions.

MtD

Offline Longislander

  • Member
  • Posts: 2,486
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #88 on: March 22, 2007, 12:09:27 AM »
I know some of you have great fondness for Jonathan, and I can appreciate that. However, blindy defending Jonathon is NOT COOL.

Quote
Secondly, had you bothered to review the Page-Shafer and Romero studies, you would


I never said a word to Jonathon, in this thread, prior to his post to me. I suppose the above statement from Jonathon to me is perfectly acceptable according to your (pl) standards.

Got it.
infected 10/05 diagnosed 12-05
2/06   379/57000                    6/07 372/30500 25%   4/09 640/U/32% 
5/06   ?? /37000                     8/07 491/55000/24%    9/09 913/U/39%
8/06   349/9500 25%              11/07 515/68000/24     2/10 845/U/38%
9/06   507/16,000 30% !          2/08  516/116k/22%    7/10 906/80/39%
12/06 398/29000 26%             Start Atripla 3/08
3/07   402/80,000 29%            4/08  485/undet!/27
4/07   507/35,000 25%            7/08 625/UD/34%
                                                 11/08 684/U/36%

Offline Dachshund

  • Member
  • Posts: 5,956
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #89 on: March 22, 2007, 12:13:17 AM »
I know some of you have great fondness for Jonathan, and I can appreciate that. However, blindy defending Jonathon is NOT COOL.
 

I never said a word to Jonathon, in this thread, prior to his post to me. I suppose the above statement from Jonathon to me is perfectly acceptable according to your (pl) standards.

Got it.


Yep I got it.

Offline Longislander

  • Member
  • Posts: 2,486
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #90 on: March 22, 2007, 12:13:35 AM »
Quote
And this thread is not the place for a scientific discussion of oral sex and first tier peer review. I for sure am NOT going to further alienate myself from this site by starting yet another, ultimately pointless oral sex thread in the LIVING WITH forum. I stand firmly behind my research, and the efficacy of the assertions I have made. That having been said, I welcome the new member, and in THIS forum, it is absolutely irrelevant HOW someone became infected - except that silence is construed by many who lurk as complicity.

Quote
At no time did anyone insinuate that Key had no business asking his question, Paul.


they didn't? Thanks for the clarification, I'd stand corrected if I were wrong.
infected 10/05 diagnosed 12-05
2/06   379/57000                    6/07 372/30500 25%   4/09 640/U/32% 
5/06   ?? /37000                     8/07 491/55000/24%    9/09 913/U/39%
8/06   349/9500 25%              11/07 515/68000/24     2/10 845/U/38%
9/06   507/16,000 30% !          2/08  516/116k/22%    7/10 906/80/39%
12/06 398/29000 26%             Start Atripla 3/08
3/07   402/80,000 29%            4/08  485/undet!/27
4/07   507/35,000 25%            7/08 625/UD/34%
                                                 11/08 684/U/36%

Offline thunter34

  • Member
  • Posts: 7,314
  • His name is Carl.
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #91 on: March 22, 2007, 12:22:17 AM »
"Fondness for Jonathan" has nothing to do with it from my end.  And I'm not blindly defending anything or anyone  here.  I'm calling out an inappropriate statement...with eyes wide open.
AIDS isn't for sissies.

Offline Longislander

  • Member
  • Posts: 2,486
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #92 on: March 22, 2007, 12:27:01 AM »
doubt that.
infected 10/05 diagnosed 12-05
2/06   379/57000                    6/07 372/30500 25%   4/09 640/U/32% 
5/06   ?? /37000                     8/07 491/55000/24%    9/09 913/U/39%
8/06   349/9500 25%              11/07 515/68000/24     2/10 845/U/38%
9/06   507/16,000 30% !          2/08  516/116k/22%    7/10 906/80/39%
12/06 398/29000 26%             Start Atripla 3/08
3/07   402/80,000 29%            4/08  485/undet!/27
4/07   507/35,000 25%            7/08 625/UD/34%
                                                 11/08 684/U/36%

Offline Matty the Damned

  • Member
  • Posts: 12,228
  • Ninja Please
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #93 on: March 22, 2007, 12:37:59 AM »
Paul,

You're right. I am extraordinarily fond of Jonathan. He is one of my most favourite people in this place. He has been since I staggered in here two years ago.

But that's not why I'm defending him.

I don't have to defend JK - he is more than capable of doing that himself. I'm supporting his position because on this issue he is right. End of story.

MtD

Offline thunter34

  • Member
  • Posts: 7,314
  • His name is Carl.
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #94 on: March 22, 2007, 12:41:29 AM »
doubt that.

Doubt that, do you?  Paul, I am steaming from head to hoof over that comment you made above- and even moreso by how steadfast you are standing behind it.  I'm not defending Jonathan so much as admonishing you for a callous statement.

For the record:  I would have called out the horrible swipe of yours no matter who was on the receiving end because it is foul and utterly inappropriate.  Believe it or not, I would have said the very same thing to Jonathan had he hurled such a comment at you.  

For now, I shall take the high road and leave the contents of your PM between us.

Take care of yourself as well.
AIDS isn't for sissies.

Offline Bucko

  • Member
  • Posts: 1,947
  • You need a shine, missy!
    • The Spin Cycle
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #95 on: March 22, 2007, 12:44:55 AM »
Doubt that, do you?  Paul, I am steaming from head to hoof over that comment you made above- and even moreso by how steadfast you are standing behind it.  I'm not defending Jonathan so much as admonishing you for a callous statement.

For the record:  I would have called out the horrible swipe of yours no matter who was on the receiving end because it is foul and utterly inappropriate.  Believe it or not, I would have said the very same thing to Jonathan had he hurled such a comment at you. 

For now, I shall take the high road and leave the contents of your PM between us.

Take care of yourself as well.

I'd like a peek. ;D

Brent
(Who lives and dies by what he writes)
Blessed with brains, talent and gorgeous tits.

The revolutionary smart set reads The Spin Cycle at least once every day.

Blathering on AIDSmeds since 2005, provocative from birth

Offline Longislander

  • Member
  • Posts: 2,486
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #96 on: March 22, 2007, 12:46:41 AM »
Matthew,

You can support Jonathon all you like- on his beliefs, his research, and the like. I'm not sure what Jonathons 'qualifications' are, but if you're ok with them, Matthew, good for you.  But supporting someone being rude and/or dismissive to another member is not cool.

Paul
infected 10/05 diagnosed 12-05
2/06   379/57000                    6/07 372/30500 25%   4/09 640/U/32% 
5/06   ?? /37000                     8/07 491/55000/24%    9/09 913/U/39%
8/06   349/9500 25%              11/07 515/68000/24     2/10 845/U/38%
9/06   507/16,000 30% !          2/08  516/116k/22%    7/10 906/80/39%
12/06 398/29000 26%             Start Atripla 3/08
3/07   402/80,000 29%            4/08  485/undet!/27
4/07   507/35,000 25%            7/08 625/UD/34%
                                                 11/08 684/U/36%

Offline Longislander

  • Member
  • Posts: 2,486
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #97 on: March 22, 2007, 12:48:42 AM »
Tim, go right ahead and share my PM to you. Why is it you feel the need to insinuate to everyone that I said something incredibly vile to you in it?
infected 10/05 diagnosed 12-05
2/06   379/57000                    6/07 372/30500 25%   4/09 640/U/32% 
5/06   ?? /37000                     8/07 491/55000/24%    9/09 913/U/39%
8/06   349/9500 25%              11/07 515/68000/24     2/10 845/U/38%
9/06   507/16,000 30% !          2/08  516/116k/22%    7/10 906/80/39%
12/06 398/29000 26%             Start Atripla 3/08
3/07   402/80,000 29%            4/08  485/undet!/27
4/07   507/35,000 25%            7/08 625/UD/34%
                                                 11/08 684/U/36%

Offline Dachshund

  • Member
  • Posts: 5,956
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #98 on: March 22, 2007, 12:58:52 AM »
Who's Matthew?

Offline Matty the Damned

  • Member
  • Posts: 12,228
  • Ninja Please
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #99 on: March 22, 2007, 01:03:22 AM »
Paul,

The only one in this thread who is being discourteous is you. The rest of us are being Herculean in our efforts to remain calm and civil about this.

Jonathan was neither rude nor dismissive. His answers to Key were detailed, referenced and most polite. He was measured in response to you as well.

MtD

Offline Longislander

  • Member
  • Posts: 2,486
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #100 on: March 22, 2007, 01:06:26 AM »
right. You all can fight amongst each other all night. I have to get to bed.
infected 10/05 diagnosed 12-05
2/06   379/57000                    6/07 372/30500 25%   4/09 640/U/32% 
5/06   ?? /37000                     8/07 491/55000/24%    9/09 913/U/39%
8/06   349/9500 25%              11/07 515/68000/24     2/10 845/U/38%
9/06   507/16,000 30% !          2/08  516/116k/22%    7/10 906/80/39%
12/06 398/29000 26%             Start Atripla 3/08
3/07   402/80,000 29%            4/08  485/undet!/27
4/07   507/35,000 25%            7/08 625/UD/34%
                                                 11/08 684/U/36%

Offline thunter34

  • Member
  • Posts: 7,314
  • His name is Carl.
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #101 on: March 22, 2007, 01:20:14 AM »
right. You all can fight amongst each other all night. I have to get to bed.

For the record:  I am not- nor was I ever- really defending Jonathan.  He can take care of himself.  And while I do respect and admire the guy, I would hardly classify us as anything like "thick as thieves" or anything.  The bottom line is that I found your statement insulting and callous.  I was offended by it.  I also found the assertion that I follow blind devotion to JK (or anyone, for that matter) to be an insult to my intelligence.  That, more than anything else, is what I found so "vile" about the PM.

Hope you can sleep well.
AIDS isn't for sissies.

Offline Miss Philicia

  • Member
  • Posts: 24,064
  • celebrity poster, faker & poser
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #102 on: March 22, 2007, 01:22:09 AM »
Considering there are a certain amount of people on disability here I'm sure it was offensive to more than one person.  Not a particularly tactful comment to make on an HIV forum.
"I’ve slept with enough men to know that I’m not gay"

Offline Bucko

  • Member
  • Posts: 1,947
  • You need a shine, missy!
    • The Spin Cycle
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #103 on: March 22, 2007, 01:41:08 AM »
When I deplored the whole us/them breakdown in this forum, I described it as an essentially economic dichotomy. This is palpable proof of it.

Bullies on the forum? Nah...

Brent
(Who takes the bus to the food pantry, but also to work)
Blessed with brains, talent and gorgeous tits.

The revolutionary smart set reads The Spin Cycle at least once every day.

Blathering on AIDSmeds since 2005, provocative from birth

Offline Val

  • Member
  • Posts: 938
  • Praxitèles -- Satyre au repos
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #104 on: March 22, 2007, 03:31:42 AM »
Guys,
What's the point of continuing this discussion?  This thread should be "locked", perhaps?  Anyway, you cannot blame any of the guys, be it on Jonathan, be it on Paul,  for being upfront, direct.  I, for one thing, appreciate sincerity no matter at what (high)  price it comes...
I see Paul defending himself, since he was attacked first.  Period

And I understand Jonathan's "repugnant"  (a strong word, perhaps?) emotions, since he has always attempted  to provide scientific, correct  data on the subject.  This, in itself, is really laudable.  On the other hand, I also see someone who's dealing with a lot of things right now, and may be a little over-sensitive!

Paul's remarks were very harsh, but at least he was sincere!   I would excuse myself to Jonathan if I was on his shoes.  Jonathan could excuse himself as well, right?  Why is it so difficult to come down your pedestals  and say "I am sorry"?

Val
___
___
P.S. Paul has often  "corrected" Jonathan's  general ( not scientific) assertions (like in this thread) in the past,  and he was almost always...right!  He did go a little bit too far this time, though, and I'm sure he'll come to realize that...
« Last Edit: March 22, 2007, 05:24:29 AM by Val »
Arthus Bertrand
http://www.yannarthusbertrand.com/yann2/affichage.php?reference=TVDC%20YABFR084&pais=France
Ali Mahdavi
http://asyoudesireme.online.fr/index.htm
Richard de Chazal
http://www.richarddechazal.com/
Daniel Nassoy
http://www.danielnassoy.com/pages/galeries_portraits_2.html
Photography:
The word comes from the Greek words φως phos ("light"), and γραφίς graphis ("stylus", "paintbrush") or γραφή graphê, together meaning "drawing with light" or "representation by means of lines".

Offline Peter Staley

  • Member
  • Posts: 1,337
  • Founder & Advisory Editor, AIDSmeds.com
    • AIDSmeds.com
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #105 on: March 22, 2007, 08:48:49 AM »
If I had as much time on my hands as you do, I just may have read it.

Agreed -- this is out of line.  Longislander, please back away from this thread, and take a little breather, before you get yourself into trouble.

Peter

Offline keyite

  • Member
  • Posts: 514
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #106 on: March 22, 2007, 08:51:47 AM »
Boy, when I had a vague suspicion this topic might result in a bit of heat I certainly wasn't far off!

So what have I learnt from this? Well, first off it was never actually my intention to change people's minds as a consequence of this thread - I'm not that arrogant. I was merely hoping to be clearer in my own mind why there is such a gap between what lots of pozzies think (there's no risk to oral sex) and what some of us report (that we believe we got infected that way). No, I'm not particularly 'stuck' on how I got infected - it's all water under the bridge - but whether I like it or not it does impact how I move forward; it's not easy to find your place amongst your fellow pozzies when a large proportion dismiss your experience as just plain denial, delusion, mistaken, etc. Well, it didn't just happen via immaculate transmission. Kinda makes me feel rather invisible, you know? It also hugely impacts on the decisions me, and other pozzies, need to make as we negotiate the future sexual encounters we'll have.

Has this discussion helped that quandary further along? Yes and no. It probably won't help me move forward - I'll just have to find my own way on that one, and I no doubt will. But I do better understand why the gap is there. The reality is that much is at stake on this issue (future sexual behaviour, past exposing of other people, etc) and that will make opinion very entrenched. People believe what they want to believe. Possibly on both sides of this argument.

I have taken note of all the references to scientific papers and the resulting claims that there is NO WAY you could get infected via oral sex. But I find myself wondering why it is that HIV prevention agencies as well as ID and other doctors across the world still won't say there is no risk to oral sex (no, they're not all under the spell of W). Not one (at least that I'm aware of) say "go head, suck and swallow all you like, you'll be fine". Why not? After all, there'd be little doubt that the general prevention effort on vaginal/anal sex would be helped enormously if they were able to give populations free reign on this behaviour. Is it that they're worried about getting sued by crackpots like me? They'd have nothing to fear because there is (to quote another member) "none, nada, zip, zilch, bupkis" evidence that I could support my prosecution case on. One huge conspiracy or perhaps it just isn't that clear cut after all?

For the avoidance of doubt: I am not claiming infection via oral sex to be anything other than a low risk (but not no risk). There will often be special circumstances. Someone mentioned oral health problems - did not apply in my case but I get the impression it often does. Whether or not you take cum in the mouth will obviously make a big difference (I did). I also suspect transmission is far more likely when viral load is exceptionally high (only really likely to be the case amongst those undiagnosed, whether newly infected or late stage - they're obviously not highly likely to be enrolled on any scientific study).

Finally, for what it's worth (and I realise my credibility account is running very low right about now): several people have sent me PMs to say that they too believe they were infected via oral sex but that they feel too intimidated to post in this thread, or too bruised from previous discussions on this subject to participate again. I find that quite telling and very depressing. Perhaps we should form an underground network on AM: the transmission route that dare not speak its name...  ;D
« Last Edit: March 22, 2007, 09:22:52 AM by keyite »

Offline Florida69

  • Member
  • Posts: 428
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #107 on: March 22, 2007, 09:30:11 AM »
Boy, when I had a vague suspicion this topic might result in a bit of heat I certainly wasn't far off!

Finally, for what it's worth (and I realise my credibility account is running very low right about now): several people have sent me PMs to say that they too believe they were infected via oral sex but that they feel too intimidated to post in this thread, or too bruised from previous discussions on this subject to participate again. I find that quite telling and very depressing. Perhaps we should form an underground network on AM: the transmission route that dare not speak its name...  ;D


What bothers me about this thread is that we as a supposed "community" are so eager to dismiss what we do not know or understand. Unless someone can show some irrefutable proof then, I stand behind what you believe happened.  As I said prior I have two friends who think that they were infected by giving oral.  There was very little support for the person needing it which was keyite and everyone wants to believe that you can not get HIV from oral, yet the pandemic still persists.  I can not with a clear conscience ever let anyone perform oral on me without a condom, but that just shows I guess that I care about people more than my own self gratification.  I did not see any other scientific studies other than the ones I mentioned, and what bothers me most is that we are all so eager to jump on the bus of you can't get HIV by giving oral is no way to properly educate someone as being a positive person and will not protect your potential partners.  Keyite, I normally do not engage on this board, for many reasons, honestly how this thread has gone has shown me how we are misguided the HIV community on a whole.  Keyite be true to yourself, and don't worry about what other people think, most are self involved with their own agendas.  It usually helps them sleep at night.  You should be among friends, people who have been there and done that, but instead you are forced to hide who you are, and how you feel you were infected.  Respect is the ultimate issue here, I respect you enough to tell you that you have to deal with things in your own way.  I have a friend who was infected via a tattoo, whether I believe him or not is of no consequence, what matters to me is that he is a good person and takes responsibility for his own actions.  You are doing that too, which will leave you respected by many.  I am sure for my comments I will receive my first warning or whatever comes with being scolded for not following the norm, no worries it will be a while before I would want to post in such a negative environment.  Again, keyite take care of yourself and don't concern yourself with what is normal, many times they are lost in the crowd... Good luck, D
Nothing in the world can take the place of Persistence. Talent will not; nothing is more common than unsuccessful men with talent. Genius will not; unrewarded genius is almost a proverb. Education will not; the world is full of educated derelicts. Persistence and determination alone are omnipotent. The slogan 'Press On' has solved and always will solve the problems of the human race.
Calvin Coolidge

Offline scotttt

  • Member
  • Posts: 146
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #108 on: March 22, 2007, 10:13:10 AM »
I ultimately worry about misinformation leading to additional discrimination against people living with HIV.  Hysteria surrounding transmission risks leads to irrational responses in the larger society.  People are being prosecuted for "exposing" others to HIV through sexual activity.  Often the people facing prosecution engaged in activities not known for transmitting the HIV virus, but people ignore science and buy into the hysteria. 

As Jonathan so brilliantly stated that inferring that saliva is an infectious bodily fluid moves HIV from being classified as an infectious disease to a communicable disease.  Such a change in categorization has serious political and social implications. 

We cannot dismiss all the scientific data everytime someone states that their experience has contradicted the science.  Until there is sufficient data to support that HIV is transmitted readily through oral sex, I cannot help having a degree of doubt when a person asserts that he or she became infected from having given or gotten oral sex.  I am not calling anyone a liar but I often doubt what others say when what they are saying contradicts over two decades of scientific research.

Everyone is entitled to an opinion.  Some people discount science and believe that the world was made in a week and that a talking snake tempted Eve and caused her to commit the original sin.  I would not tell a person that he or she has no right to believe this, but I would note that science contradicts such assertions.  I think that is all that we are doing here, basically saying "Look, you are entitled to your opinion, but all  the scientific data states the opposite..."

Just remember what happens when we discount science and give into subjective analysis.

Offline woodshere

  • Member
  • Posts: 1,477
  • ain't no shame in my game
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #109 on: March 22, 2007, 10:19:32 AM »
I have avoided posting but think my experience might help explain the getting HIV from giving a blow job.  I have had unprotected anal sex three times in my life, only once did the other guy ejaculate inside me.  The last time being 6-7 years ago.  I have performed (and if I do say so myself some were quite a performance) oral sex let's see......hell there is no telling how many times.  Maybe......alot X 10 to the power of 2.  I found out I was positive last March.  It is awfully difficult to think that out of the countless dicks I have sucked that I contracted HIV from that one guy 6-7 years ago.

In my case I know there is no definitive way to prove how long I had been infected but when I got my initial CD4 count I asked my doctor that question.  His response was that based on my numbers he would have to say I was infected 6-7 years ago.  

I go with what the prevailing research says and how my time frame all adds up, but gosh sometimes its hard to discount all that time spent on my knees.

Woods
"Let us give pubicity to HV/AIDS and not hide it..." "One of the things destroying people with AIDS is the stigma we attach to it."   Nelson Mandela

Offline Andy Velez

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • Posts: 24,686
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #110 on: March 22, 2007, 10:32:44 AM »
Dear All,

I don't like locking threads but I'm on the verge of doing so with this one.

Along with opinions and documentation for same there have been a number of gratuitously nasty swipes, of which yours Long Islander at Jonathan, "If I had as much time on my hands as you do, I just may have read it," is notably ugly.

That kind of mean spirited remark is unacceptable here, no matter whom it's directed at. Disagreeing about an issue is not an excuse for it.

Most who have participated here have striven to keep on the topic and refused to be drawn into flaming. Some of the veterans have refused to be drawn into battle and I appreciate their restraint.

I shake my head over how quickly some really nasty things can get said here when we already have all-too-many enemies to deal with in the outside world.   

I'm not sure what more there is to be said now on the original subject of the thread. 

For the timebeing I'm leaving the thread unlocked to leave open the possibility for some useful comments, but for sure I will close it down if there's anymore flaming. 
« Last Edit: March 22, 2007, 10:35:08 AM by Andy Velez »
Andy Velez

Offline ACinKC

  • Member
  • Posts: 2,994
  • Bring it VIRUS! #2 Ranked In-crowd Member!
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #111 on: March 22, 2007, 10:52:07 AM »
What do I win for reliably predicting this thread would end up this way WAY back at the beginning of the thread?!?!

Some of us choose science as our model of beliefs.  Some of us choose anecdotal stories as our model.  It's really no different than a religious debate. 

Religious debates NEVER end well.  Like this one hasnt ended well.  Keyite was never admonished for posting what he did.  Some of us provided the science with which we form our beliefs.  Very politely I may add.  Keyite and Florida provided some counter points and a vigorous discussion ensued.

I personally am APPALLED by you Longislander.  You were WAY outta line with alot of your comments.  I too hope you are never in the position to have the KIND of time Jonathan has had available to him.  It surely was no vacation!  And it was INCREDIBLY rude for you to swipe at him like that.  Of all the things said on this thread, it was you I have lost respect for.  Not that it matters I know.  Not keyite or anyone else who holds firm in their beliefs.  I still respect them for who they are and what they believe even if I choose to believe otherwise. 

What say we all put this issue to bed.  No one is going to win this battle, and last time a member I hold in HIGH esteem left us for a long while and I would not like to see any of us leave over this.

Andrew
LIFE is not a race to the grave with the intention of arriving safely
in a pretty and well-preserved body, but, rather to skid in broadside,
thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming--WOW! WHAT A
RIDE!!!

Offline thunter34

  • Member
  • Posts: 7,314
  • His name is Carl.
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #112 on: March 22, 2007, 11:01:06 AM »
My feelings as well. 

This thread is cursed!  CURSED, I say!
AIDS isn't for sissies.

Offline Central79

  • Member
  • Posts: 527
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #113 on: March 22, 2007, 11:20:33 AM »
This is an interesting thread. I'm convinced that I got HIV through giving a blowjob. I definitely seroconverted in December 2005 (the flu does not give you persistant generalised lymphadenopathy) and I had not had unprotected anal sex at any point for about 4 years (and 4 HIV -ve test results) prior to that.

I'm not saying that I think it's a high-risk activity, in fact I think it's so low risk that most of the studies Jonathan provides in another thread aren't significantly powerful to seperate the risk of oral sex out from the rest.

At the end of the day, the science on this is all "anecdotal", in that it relies on people self-reporting their own behaviour. It's not as if there is anything that you can measure. So I'm not sure that Keyite's (and my) experience is necessarily any less scientific that these collections of anecdotes.

It doesn't make me feel any better that I got it this way. And I appreciate that it's very low risk, otherwise I wouldn't let the negative guy I love go down on me.

Diagnosed January 2006
26/1/06 - 860 (22%), VL > 500,000
24/4/06 - 820 (24.6%), VL 158,000
13/7/06 - 840 (22%), VL 268,000
1/11/06 - 680 (21%), VL 93,100
29/1/07 - 1,020 (27.5%), VL 46,500
15/5/07 - 1,140 (22.8%), VL not done.
13/10/07 - 759 (23.2%), VL 170,000
6/11/07 - 630 (25%), VL 19,324
14/1/08 - 650 (21%), VL 16,192
15/4/08 - 590 (21%), VL 40, 832

Offline aupointillimite

  • Member
  • Posts: 3,229
  • FUS DO RAH!
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #114 on: March 22, 2007, 11:59:51 AM »
This thread is like Castle Anthrax.

I'll be Zoot.

"And after the spankings, the oral sex!"
Your tastebuds can't repel flavor of this magnitude!

Offline David_CA

  • Member
  • Posts: 3,246
  • Joined: March 2006
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #115 on: March 22, 2007, 01:44:14 PM »
I asked this earlier, but got no answers.  Do the studies indicate that the receiver of the oral sex ejaculated in the mouth of the giver?  I know pre-cum can be infections during unprotected anal sex, and it's often hard, if not impossible, to tell if it's occurred.  During oral sex, it's really easy to tell, obviously.  I guess I'm wondering if the studies say that a mouth full of semen, swallowing that semen directly (without it actually being in mouth), or not allowing semen in the mouth at all are all in the same risk category.  I'm not debating the 'it's possible' or 'it's impossible' aspects of infection during oral sex.

David
Black Friday 03-03-2006
03-23-06 CD4 359 @27.4% VL 75,938
06-01-06 CD4 462 @24.3% VL > 100,000
08-15-06 CD4 388 @22.8% VL >  "
10-21-06 CD4 285 @21.9% VL >  "
  Atripla started 12-01-2006
01-08-07 CD4 429 @26.8% VL 1872!
05-08-07 CD4 478 @28.1% VL 740
08-03-07 CD4 509 @31.8% VL 370
11-06-07 CD4 570 @30.0% VL 140
02-21-08 CD4 648 @32.4% VL 600
05-19-08 CD4 695 @33.1% VL < 48 undetectable!
08-21-08 CD4 725 @34.5%
11-11-08 CD4 672 @39.5%
02-11-09 CD4 773 @36.8%
05-11-09 CD4 615 @36.2%
08-19-09 CD4 770 @38.5%
11-19-09 CD4 944 @33.7%
02-17-10 CD4 678 @39.9%  
06-03-10 CD4 768 @34.9%
09-21-10 CD4 685 @40.3%
01-10-11 CD4 908 @36.3%
05-23-11 CD4 846 @36.8% VL 80
02-13-12 CD4 911 @41.4% VL<20
You must be the change you want to see in the world.  Mahatma Gandhi

Offline scotttt

  • Member
  • Posts: 146
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #116 on: March 22, 2007, 02:32:01 PM »
"Do the studies indicate that the receiver of the oral sex ejaculated in the mouth of the giver? "

Hi David,

What I recall from reading the UCSF study involving serodiscordant couples included a significant proportion who swallowed their partners semen regularly and not one neggie was infected.  This study spanned an entire decade and I believe there were apprx. 100 couples studied.

Scott

Offline allanq

  • Member
  • Posts: 689
  • still life with pills
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #117 on: March 22, 2007, 02:45:05 PM »
I'm sorry but the statistics don't show that you are "taking a big chance" when you give a blowjob.  At BEST its an extremely LOW risk but most likely only theoretical (according to the studies which is what we go by in the AM I forum).

What is a "theoretical" risk? I've seen this term used a number of times, and I've never understood exactly what it means.
Top (Breakfast): Prezista, Norvir, Isentress, Zoloft (2), Glyburide (2), Aspirin
Bottom right (Dinner): Prezista, Norvir, Isentress
Bottom left (Bedtime): Sustiva, Trazodone (2), Lipitor, Septra (no longer taking this)
Center: Alprazolam (Xanax)
Not shown: various vitamins & supplements

Offline thunter34

  • Member
  • Posts: 7,314
  • His name is Carl.
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #118 on: March 22, 2007, 02:51:42 PM »
What is a "theoretical" risk? I've seen this term used a number of times, and I've never understood exactly what it means.

It is basically like the old saying, "You could get hit by a bus".

Kudos to David for diplomacy!  Very carefully done, D!   You traversed the landmines of this thread quite nicely!  :-*
AIDS isn't for sissies.

Offline David_CA

  • Member
  • Posts: 3,246
  • Joined: March 2006
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #119 on: March 22, 2007, 02:53:51 PM »
It is basically like the old saying, "You could get hit by a bus".

Kudos to David for diplomacy!  Very carefully done, D!   You traversed the landmines of this thread quite nicely!  :-*

And watch out for those buses... especially if I happen to be driving, or worse, backing it up (the bus, that is  ;) )!

Thanks for the clarification, Scott.  I guess swallowing wouldn't be as 'bad' as swishing and gargling with it! 

David

Black Friday 03-03-2006
03-23-06 CD4 359 @27.4% VL 75,938
06-01-06 CD4 462 @24.3% VL > 100,000
08-15-06 CD4 388 @22.8% VL >  "
10-21-06 CD4 285 @21.9% VL >  "
  Atripla started 12-01-2006
01-08-07 CD4 429 @26.8% VL 1872!
05-08-07 CD4 478 @28.1% VL 740
08-03-07 CD4 509 @31.8% VL 370
11-06-07 CD4 570 @30.0% VL 140
02-21-08 CD4 648 @32.4% VL 600
05-19-08 CD4 695 @33.1% VL < 48 undetectable!
08-21-08 CD4 725 @34.5%
11-11-08 CD4 672 @39.5%
02-11-09 CD4 773 @36.8%
05-11-09 CD4 615 @36.2%
08-19-09 CD4 770 @38.5%
11-19-09 CD4 944 @33.7%
02-17-10 CD4 678 @39.9%  
06-03-10 CD4 768 @34.9%
09-21-10 CD4 685 @40.3%
01-10-11 CD4 908 @36.3%
05-23-11 CD4 846 @36.8% VL 80
02-13-12 CD4 911 @41.4% VL<20
You must be the change you want to see in the world.  Mahatma Gandhi

Offline scotttt

  • Member
  • Posts: 146
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #120 on: March 22, 2007, 03:03:24 PM »
"Thanks for the clarification, Scott.  I guess swallowing wouldn't be as 'bad' as swishing and gargling with it! "

Exactly.  Although I swished, swalllowed, gargled, you name it.  One of the things I have been advised to tell people when doing HIV prevention volunteer work is "Spit or swalllow, just do let it linger in your mouth too long".

Historically semen has been used as a beauty product known for smoothing the skin.  Perhaps this is where the term "facial" comes from.   ::)

Offline ACinKC

  • Member
  • Posts: 2,994
  • Bring it VIRUS! #2 Ranked In-crowd Member!
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #121 on: March 22, 2007, 03:03:51 PM »
What is a "theoretical" risk? I've seen this term used a number of times, and I've never understood exactly what it means.

Theoretically we can time travel.  However, no one has done that yet.  Its the same thing.  Can the scientists rule out that it is impossible?  No.  Can they PROVE its possible? No.  They can only theorize that it can be done based on the scientific research of 100 years or more and the known laws of physics.


That help?  Or did I make it worse?
LIFE is not a race to the grave with the intention of arriving safely
in a pretty and well-preserved body, but, rather to skid in broadside,
thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming--WOW! WHAT A
RIDE!!!

Offline thunter34

  • Member
  • Posts: 7,314
  • His name is Carl.
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #122 on: March 22, 2007, 03:16:13 PM »
Historically semen has been used as a beauty product known for smoothing the skin.  Perhaps this is where the term "facial" comes from.   ::)



Well, that goes a long way toward explaining how I've maintained my Hi-Pro Glow.
AIDS isn't for sissies.

Offline Matty the Damned

  • Member
  • Posts: 12,228
  • Ninja Please
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #123 on: March 22, 2007, 03:16:51 PM »
Finally, for what it's worth (and I realise my credibility account is running very low right about now): several people have sent me PMs to say that they too believe they were infected via oral sex but that they feel too intimidated to post in this thread, or too bruised from previous discussions on this subject to participate again. I find that quite telling and very depressing. Perhaps we should form an underground network on AM: the transmission route that dare not speak its name...

Key,

For my part I don't think your credibility is running low at the moment. I said earlier that I think you have every right to ask the questions that you did and expect reasonable answers.

Which is what you received. You even got Jakey trying out his Live from the Improv routine. ;)

However I do get a little bit tired of this "people feel too intimidated to post" argument. Why? Because a large number of us (who have formed our view based on the peer reviewed science that abounds on this issue) dispute oral sex as a transmission route?

Is this what things have come to?

MtD

Offline NycJoe

  • Member
  • Posts: 241
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #124 on: March 22, 2007, 04:21:21 PM »
I am just waiting for the...its impossible to get hiv through oral sex.  Until then..its possible.  Chances are next to nil..but hey..chances are next to nothing I will win the mega millions lottery tomorrow..but someone will.  It is theoretically possible.  So who am I to tell someone HOW they got something?

Offline Lis

  • Member
  • Posts: 593
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #125 on: March 22, 2007, 05:01:30 PM »
What NycJoe said!!!!

hardly ever does not mean never
poz 1986....

Offline pozcutie

  • member
  • Posts: 1
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #126 on: March 22, 2007, 10:34:35 PM »
I, too, got infected via oral sex.  I seroconverted in July 2000.  I had been testing negative on a semi-monthly basis for that entire year, up through May, and had been using a condom for all anal sex (which was insertive on my part). 

In May of that year, I started seeing someone, and we had only had oral sex, when I got sick: flu-like symptoms, thrush, etc.  Turns out that I got mono and HIV from him.  I even made a point of contacting anyone I'd had sex with during the six months prior, to make sure that they were okay, and all were neg.  Even though transmission via oral sex is "negligible" by some calculations, that does not mean impossible. 

There are factors which can increase the possibility of transmission, such as: the viral load of the HIV+ partner; brushing and flossing prior to giving head (exposes the gums, etc.); and allowing the semen to linger, as it were (perhaps if I'd just swallowed, I wouldn't have been exposed as much).

So, the lessons learned are: don't kiss 18yo boys (you can get mono); don't floss before going down on someone; and 'tis better to swallow than to snowball.

Offline Val

  • Member
  • Posts: 938
  • Praxitèles -- Satyre au repos
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #127 on: March 23, 2007, 05:45:42 AM »
I know that people can defend themselves whenever the need arises, but I don't understand why PM someone when you're feeling THAT concerned about something!  Wouldn't it just be much simpler if everyone concerned about  "trasmission via oral sex" just stated plain and simple their stories?  Ans since this subject keeps re-surfacing around these forums and,  therefore  feeding some vivid exchanges between members,  we could deal with them once and for all...! 

Val
___
___
Arthus Bertrand
http://www.yannarthusbertrand.com/yann2/affichage.php?reference=TVDC%20YABFR084&pais=France
Ali Mahdavi
http://asyoudesireme.online.fr/index.htm
Richard de Chazal
http://www.richarddechazal.com/
Daniel Nassoy
http://www.danielnassoy.com/pages/galeries_portraits_2.html
Photography:
The word comes from the Greek words φως phos ("light"), and γραφίς graphis ("stylus", "paintbrush") or γραφή graphê, together meaning "drawing with light" or "representation by means of lines".

Offline chaton

  • Member
  • Posts: 9
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #128 on: March 23, 2007, 06:47:50 AM »
Hi key

Sorry that you hit upon the one truly damaging issue with aidsmeds forum, ie oral sex infection negationism. Some of the most active, respected and vocal long timers have consistently denied oral sex hiv infection despite the consensus warnings of western health ministries to their populations. Please note for instance that in France, where I reside, and where the HIV virus was first isolated by Pr Luc Montagnier, the health ministry and Act Up have launched a campaign to raise awareness about hiv infection through fellatio.

Please do not take too seriously the endless clubbing about "peer reviewed science has shown that it is not possible". This is not true. Do read the articles, by all means.

1/ If you have some statistical training, you will see that these articles prove that the lower bound for the range of probability to get infected orally by a seropositive partner is zero, not that the higher bound is zero. Think of it this way ; you take 1000 people who play every week at the lottery and after ten years not ONE has won the big prize. Does it show that no one ever does? That you can play the lottery with absolute confidence that you will never win the big prize? That people who claim thay have won the big prize are liars and that peer reviewed science has shown that? Well, no. It shows that it is very unlikely (one could from these paper calculate a higher bound for the probability of infection from a seropositive partner at one in x millions with a confidence ratio of 95%, one in y millions with a confidence ratio of 99%)

2/ Furthermore these articles say nothing of the risk of infection by seronegative partners with sky high viral loads in their sperm(ie those infected say two weeks prior).  

Regards

Cyril

Offline Dachshund

  • Member
  • Posts: 5,956
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #129 on: March 23, 2007, 07:22:16 AM »
Believe me I have no dog in this hunt, but why not start a new content thread entitled (CSI: NY) how I became HIV positive...that's my story and I am sticking to it. Argument by anecdote, chicken or the egg, ad nauseum.

I would be interested in Newt's or Tim Horn's opinions on the subject.

Offline thunter34

  • Member
  • Posts: 7,314
  • His name is Carl.
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #130 on: March 23, 2007, 10:21:38 AM »
No one's been known to have gotten HIV from a mosquito..........yet.       :o



Cursed, I say........cursed.
AIDS isn't for sissies.

Offline bear60

  • Member
  • Posts: 4,104
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #131 on: March 23, 2007, 10:30:53 AM »

Do you think its ok to wash a dildo out in the sink?  I have no dishwasher to put it in and am afraid I might reinfect myself.
Poz Bear Type in Philadelphia

Offline Florida69

  • Member
  • Posts: 428
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #132 on: March 23, 2007, 02:02:19 PM »
Joel, that is really funny............. 

[attachment deleted by admin]
Nothing in the world can take the place of Persistence. Talent will not; nothing is more common than unsuccessful men with talent. Genius will not; unrewarded genius is almost a proverb. Education will not; the world is full of educated derelicts. Persistence and determination alone are omnipotent. The slogan 'Press On' has solved and always will solve the problems of the human race.
Calvin Coolidge

Offline bocker3

  • Member
  • Posts: 3,386
  • You gotta enjoy life......
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #133 on: March 23, 2007, 03:37:39 PM »
I dare say that none of the studies listed in this thread make a declaration like, "Oral sex poses no risk of transmission."  The evidence certainly points to the fact that there is extremely low risk associated with oral sex -- the fact that no DOCUMENTED cases exist, does not translate into an impossibility.  It is virtually impossible to prove a negative here, because each individual is different -- that is why one can not entirely ignore anecdotes.  One should never use anecdotes to make sweeping assessments, but neither should they be swept under the rug.  Outliers exist in scientific studies too!

Do I believe oral sex is high risk -- NO.  In fact, with my VL undetectable, I have no problem with my negative partner giving me a blow job (of course, no cumming in his mouth).  However, I do believe there is some risk, albeit extremely low, which is why I did not let him blow me while I had a detectable VL.  This did, naturally, involve back and forth discussions between us -- to get us both to a point where we were comfortable with the risk.

So, do I think there are people who got infected via oral sex -- how the hell do I know -- but if there are, there probably aren't many.  Should oral sex be discounted as a meaningless risk -- that is for individuals to decide.  Will this cause some WW's to worry even more -- perhaps, but when there are those who worry that protected sex puts them at risk, I guess there isn't much we can do to stop them from worrying.

There have been posts here that seem to paint this issue as black and white -- if it were, then science would be stating that there is NO RISK from oral sex.  This is, I'm afraid, a grey area.

Now before anyone starts saying that I don't know what I'm talking about -- I have a degree in Epidemiology and Biostatistics, so don't go there.

Mike
Atripla - Started 12/05
Reyataz/Norvir - Added 6/06
Labs - Pre-Meds
Sep05 T=350/25% VL98,559
Nov05 288/18%  47,564
Current Labs
May2013 691/31% <20

Offline keyite

  • Member
  • Posts: 514
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #134 on: March 23, 2007, 05:37:37 PM »
Matt Mee, chaton, bocker3,

Thank you all, that makes a lot of sense. I have the utmost respect for science but I'm not really surprised to hear there are phenomena it will struggle to measure and therefore document. Obviously doesn't mean they couldn't possibly be real.

Three of us in this thread have stated we believe we were infected via oral sex. A few more have contacted me via PM. In a very limited sample, i.e. those that happened to read this thread. By no means representative, of course, but you have to wonder where the tipping point towards even the slightest whiff of doubt lies for those that insist there is NO WAY you could get infected via oral sex.
« Last Edit: March 23, 2007, 05:43:29 PM by keyite »

Offline Andy Velez

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • Posts: 24,686
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #135 on: March 23, 2007, 05:42:34 PM »
Key, it IS good to have the difference of opinions and experiences that have been expressed here in a respectful setting. 

At the same time I also think let's differentiate between the acts of giving oral and receiving it.

The doubts seem to be strictly in relation to those who say they have become infected through performing oral on a guy, NOT from those who have been sucked, which is a very important difference to make. 

 
« Last Edit: March 23, 2007, 05:45:13 PM by Andy Velez »
Andy Velez

Offline keyite

  • Member
  • Posts: 514
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #136 on: March 23, 2007, 05:45:24 PM »
The doubts seem to be strictly in relation to those who say they have become infected through performing oral on a guy, NOT from those who have been sucked.

Agreed.

Offline Merlin

  • Member
  • Posts: 642
  • As My WILL, So MOTE It Be !
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #137 on: March 23, 2007, 06:07:18 PM »
If giving and one can receive, then will it mean that everyone who used to love giving will stop overnight???  ;D
I doubt so. It probably just means that most will modify and give cautiously in future. Or will there will be extremes where some will just stop giving and start receiving instead, unless of cos that too proves an issue? Then it's truly one's personal decision how to moderate /minimise the risks involved.

Interesting seeing something so simple morph into something so complicated....sure sucks doesn't it? :D ::)

Peace everyone.
Michael
I'll leave Hatred to those not strong enough to Love.

                            +++

Believe & The Power Of The Mind Transforms.
Make It Happen...

                            +++

I blame them for nothing.
I forgive them for everything.

---->> Mary J. Blige on dysfuctional parents

Offline Andy Velez

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • Posts: 24,686
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #138 on: March 23, 2007, 06:18:54 PM »
"...start receiving instead, unless of cos that too proves an issue?"

That was my point, Michael. The scientific  and medical communities are in agreement on that one and it's well documented. Having someone give you a blowjob is NOT a risk for transmission for the one getting serviced.

I'm repeating that again now because I don't want to see a seed of doubt planted about that because it has no basis in HIV-science, and your comment seems to me to raise doubt about it again.

Andy Velez

Offline scotttt

  • Member
  • Posts: 146
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #139 on: March 23, 2007, 06:24:06 PM »
"The scientific  and medical communities are in agreement on that one and it's well documented. Having someone give you a blowjob is NOT a risk for transmission for the one getting serviced."

Thank you, thank you, thank you!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ::)

Offline thunter34

  • Member
  • Posts: 7,314
  • His name is Carl.
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #140 on: March 23, 2007, 06:56:10 PM »
I'll dare another post on this thread because of this:

I keep reading a bunch of people saying that they are OK with this and that oral-wise with their partners because of their VL being undetectable.  It has been my understanding (see the current fabu thread "Undetectable, but why not "gone"? by milker in Treatment Questions for more) that, while VL is guaged by a blood draw, the actual amount of virus present in other parts of the body (read: testicles.  read: SEMEN) may be higher than that because the meds may have less ability to corner the virus there.  This, I believe, is a similar scenario in the brain also.  Am I correct or incorrect on this?   

I think this is a tie-in situation here that should get some mention here and perhaps expounded on in the other thread. 
AIDS isn't for sissies.

Offline bocker3

  • Member
  • Posts: 3,386
  • You gotta enjoy life......
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #141 on: March 23, 2007, 07:07:01 PM »
I keep reading a bunch of people saying that they are OK with this and that oral-wise with their partners because of their VL being undetectable.  It has been my understanding (see the current fabu thread "Undetectable, but why not "gone"? by milker in Treatment Questions for more) that, while VL is guaged by a blood draw, the actual amount of virus present in other parts of the body (read: testicles.  read: SEMEN) may be higher than that because the meds may have less ability to corner the virus there.  This, I believe, is a similar scenario in the brain also.  Am I correct or incorrect on this?

You make a good point -- but when assessing what risk you and your partner find acceptable, you have to go with what you have.  It's always important to remember that undetectable doesn't mean gone.  Additionally, while <50 in the blood doesn't necessarily mean <50 in the cum, one can reasonably say that there is still less in the cum with an undetectable VL than with one of 100,000.
Again, because having my partner blow me isn't completely risk free for him, we had to figure out where we were comfortable drawing the line. 

Mike
Atripla - Started 12/05
Reyataz/Norvir - Added 6/06
Labs - Pre-Meds
Sep05 T=350/25% VL98,559
Nov05 288/18%  47,564
Current Labs
May2013 691/31% <20

Offline thunter34

  • Member
  • Posts: 7,314
  • His name is Carl.
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #142 on: March 23, 2007, 07:09:50 PM »
Yes, it is about mutually agreed upon parameters. 

I just wanted to get that point in print on here for now and future eyeballs to see.
AIDS isn't for sissies.

Offline vallyguy

  • member
  • Posts: 1
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #143 on: March 24, 2007, 02:09:34 AM »
Key,

I read your original posting, and many other subsequent ones on the subject, with great interest. It upsets me somewhat to hear so many accuse you of lying or being in denial because, you see, I'm in the same boat. I seroconverted 11 years ago. Before that I was tested every year and always tested negative. Like you, I assumed that oral sex was nearly 100% safe based on the mere fact that, if it weren't, as you said, we'd have had a much worse epidemic than we currently have. Consequently I limited my behavior almost exclusively to oral sex. The year I converted I had had anal sex only one time. I was a top, I wore a condom and my partner was negative. So the chances of an immaculate infection happening through that encounter are even more remote than getting infected via oral sex.

I've talked to my doctor (a top professional in the field) at length over the years and he can only surmise that I happened upon someone with a very high viral load at the time (this was just before PIs were introduced) when either I had a small cut in my mouth or my immune system was compromised at the time. Keep in mind that I never let anyone cum in my mouth since the epidemic began. I did have a case of Hepatitis during that year and he said that studies confirm that the likelihood of contracting HIV while fighting Hep (whether it be A, B or C) can increase fifty-fold.

Again, like you, I hold no judgement against anyone no matter how they became infected. It's a virus. Not a sin. But also, like you, I'm much more concerned about infecting someone else. There is some consolation that with an undetectable viral load, I'm much less likely to spread the virus to someone else. Nevertheless, I'm now convinced that nothing is 100% safe. Would I tell anyone out there to stop having oral sex? No way. We make choices. I chose to take that risk. And although the risk was minuscule, once you are on the wrong side of a statistic, it doesn't much matter.

VG

Offline keyite

  • Member
  • Posts: 514
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #144 on: March 24, 2007, 07:13:11 AM »
Hi Valley,

Thank you, it was fascinating reading your story and perspective. Welcome to the forums - hope to hear from you again... :)

Offline Central79

  • Member
  • Posts: 527
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #145 on: March 24, 2007, 07:30:34 AM »
Hey VG

Welcome to the forums. It's sad to hear another story of infection via oral sex - I never let anybody cum in my mouth either, but I guess either the other guy had a high VL, or I had a cut in my mouth, or both. This actually makes me feel a little bit better in that the other guy may have been a recent seroconverter himself, and consequently may not have known he was positive - it makes me easier to let go of the "non-disclosure" issue.

I think there's a lot of resistance to believing in this mode of transmission. Whilst I agree with Andy, that the risk of getting HIV from receiving a blow job is non-existent, I do think that the risk of getting HIV from giving oral to be a small but present risk. I think that it is one that becomes more apparent the safer people get, but at the moment is still swallowed up (no pun intended) by the risks of concurrent anal sex. I don't understand how there can be no cases of HIV transmission via oral sex reported - I reported it! I have a feeling that people are inclined to discount it if you've been having anal sex at the same time, even if that was protected.

I think in the UK there's a resistence amongst HIV+ gay men to accept the risk of tranmission via oral sex, because it would morally compel disclosure, which is not the law here and is down to the individual. By denying the possibility of transmission, we can argue against disclosure. I always feel in good company here, where the concensus is that you should always disclose. I'm not sure what prompted some of the earlier vitriol against Keyite, but there are obviously strong feelings under the surface here, to do with disclosure or other things.

It has been my understanding (see the current fabu thread "Undetectable, but why not "gone"? by milker in Treatment Questions for more) that, while VL is guaged by a blood draw, the actual amount of virus present in other parts of the body (read: testicles.  read: SEMEN) may be higher than that because the meds may have less ability to corner the virus there.  This, I believe, is a similar scenario in the brain also.  Am I correct or incorrect on this?   

I just want to comment on this to. Thunter is correct - undetectable VL in the blood is not always reflected in the semen. There's a general co-relation, but spikes in seminal VL can occur w/o any spikes in plasma VL. The scenario in the brain depends on what regimen you are on - some of the HIV drugs are very effective in the brain, and actually suppress VL faster than in the blood. These are AZT (zidovudine, Retrovir), d4T (stavudine, Zerit), 3TC (lamivudine, Epivir), abacavir (Ziagen), nevirapine (Viramune), efavirenz (Sustiva) and indinavir (Crixivan).

...once you are on the wrong side of a statistic, it doesn't much matter.

VG

Totally agree.

Matt.

Diagnosed January 2006
26/1/06 - 860 (22%), VL > 500,000
24/4/06 - 820 (24.6%), VL 158,000
13/7/06 - 840 (22%), VL 268,000
1/11/06 - 680 (21%), VL 93,100
29/1/07 - 1,020 (27.5%), VL 46,500
15/5/07 - 1,140 (22.8%), VL not done.
13/10/07 - 759 (23.2%), VL 170,000
6/11/07 - 630 (25%), VL 19,324
14/1/08 - 650 (21%), VL 16,192
15/4/08 - 590 (21%), VL 40, 832

Offline manhattanman

  • Member
  • Posts: 19
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #146 on: March 24, 2007, 11:18:48 AM »
No you are not barking mad.
HIV is transmitted with blood to blood or semen to blood contact.
That can happen with oral sex.
Gum inflammation, often times not visible to the naked eye, is a route of transmission.
Is it possible ? yes. Is it probable ? Depending on the circumstances, yes.


Offline thunter34

  • Member
  • Posts: 7,314
  • His name is Carl.
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #147 on: March 24, 2007, 11:29:04 AM »
No you are not barking mad.
HIV is transmitted with blood to blood or semen to blood contact.
That can happen with oral sex.
Gum inflammation, often times not visible to the naked eye, is a route of transmission.
Is it possible ? yes. Is it probable ? Depending on the circumstances, yes.

"Yes possible" and "yes probably" are some pretty muscular assertions.

Your documented evidence to back those statements would be?

Look:  I am not trying to shout down anyone who wants to say that they got it this way or that.  In fact, I think it is important to look into it- not so much for we who have already crossed over into Pozville, but for those who haven't to be better armed to protect themselves.

I just keep wanting to see something, ANYTHING concrete to back up this kind of declaration.  There appears to be science to support the other side of the argument.  I'm waiting to see it for statements like these as well.

One thing about this thread and posts like that one:  It will likely make AM more of a one-stop shop for all things HIV.  Folks will be able to get unsubstantiated fear fodder completely in-house.  No need to shop at The Body for it or anything.
AIDS isn't for sissies.

Offline NycJoe

  • Member
  • Posts: 241
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #148 on: March 24, 2007, 11:39:53 AM »
I appreciate that this thread..which had been going in the other direction of drama, smart ass comments and basically making others whom feel differently on the subject as complete idiots has come around to thoughtful insights from both sides.  I think science is very important.  But if you look at the history of science and see how many mistakes have been made and how some peer reviewed science is very biased, I always take science as less than 100% truth.  Science is not my god, however I definitely take it into major consideration knowing it is less than perfect.  I hope the debate can continue in a thoughtful manner from both sides without condescension.  Joe

Offline thunter34

  • Member
  • Posts: 7,314
  • His name is Carl.
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #149 on: March 24, 2007, 12:05:57 PM »
Science isn't my God, either...but I'd place more faith in some evidence rather than none.
AIDS isn't for sissies.

Offline Central79

  • Member
  • Posts: 527
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #150 on: March 24, 2007, 12:25:01 PM »
Science isn't my God, either...but I'd place more faith in some evidence rather than none.

Well you've heard some evidence in this thread. From me, and from Keyite and from other members.

Just because it isn't in the form of a peer reviewed paper doesn't make it nothing.
Diagnosed January 2006
26/1/06 - 860 (22%), VL > 500,000
24/4/06 - 820 (24.6%), VL 158,000
13/7/06 - 840 (22%), VL 268,000
1/11/06 - 680 (21%), VL 93,100
29/1/07 - 1,020 (27.5%), VL 46,500
15/5/07 - 1,140 (22.8%), VL not done.
13/10/07 - 759 (23.2%), VL 170,000
6/11/07 - 630 (25%), VL 19,324
14/1/08 - 650 (21%), VL 16,192
15/4/08 - 590 (21%), VL 40, 832

Offline thunter34

  • Member
  • Posts: 7,314
  • His name is Carl.
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #151 on: March 24, 2007, 12:37:06 PM »
Well you've heard some evidence in this thread. From me, and from Keyite and from other members.

Just because it isn't in the form of a peer reviewed paper doesn't make it nothing.


No, I haven't heard evidence.  I've heard anecdotes.  And we're back to anecdote < evidence.  I am not saying your testimonials are "nothing", but I don't believe they carry the same weight as information collected from careful study.

Just to illustrate what I am saying:  If I came on here and said, "I got HIV from a mosquito.  I am certain that is what happened."  Would my saying that automatically qualify that statement to have equal footing as documented research that would contradict such a claim? 

EDITED TO SAY:  I am simply going to choose to err on the side that has more solid backing for it.  I'm not going to say something is completely out of the realm of theoretical possibility, but I have to counter "possible and maybe even probable" statements like the one above.
« Last Edit: March 24, 2007, 12:39:38 PM by thunter34 »
AIDS isn't for sissies.

Offline milker

  • Member
  • Posts: 4,034
  • Protected phone sex
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #152 on: March 24, 2007, 12:52:35 PM »
http://www.avert.org/orlsx.htm has a good way of explaining the risks and http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/resources/qa/qa19.htm is from the cdc.

I believe the answers given by Andy, Ann, Rapid, etc.. in the "Im I infected" forum related to blow jobs are correct. If someone is asking you "Am I going to get hit by a bus tomorrow?" the answer cannot be "yes", the answer cannot be "no", the probability of getting hit by a bus is so low that you cannot possibly tell people "there is a slight risk, so when you see a bus be careful", that wouldn't make sense and wouldn't help anyone. "Be careful in general, know when to cross the street, look left and right before you cross" is a better answer.

Milker.
mid-dec: stupid ass
mid-jan: seroconversion
mid-feb: poz
mar 07: cd4 432 (35%) vl 54000
may 07: cd4 399 (28%) vl 27760
jul 07: cd4 403 (26%) vl 99241
oct 07: cd4 353 (24%) vl 29993
jan 08: cd4 332 (26%) vl 33308
mar 08: cd4 392 (23%) vl 75548
jun 08: cd4 325 (27%) vl 45880
oct 08: cd4 197 (20%) vl 154000 <== aids diagnosis
nov 2 08 start Atripla
nov 30 08: cd4 478 (23%) vl 1880 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
feb 19 09: cd4 398 (24%) vl 430 getting there!
apr 23 09: cd4 604 (29%) vl 50 woohoo :D :D
jul 30 09: cd4 512 (29%) vl undetectable :D :D
may 27 10: cd4 655 (32%) vl undetectable :D :D

Now accepting applications from blowjob ninjas™

Offline bocker3

  • Member
  • Posts: 3,386
  • You gotta enjoy life......
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #153 on: March 24, 2007, 12:57:01 PM »
"Yes possible" and "yes probably" are some pretty muscular assertions.

Your documented evidence to back those statements would be?

Look:  I am not trying to shout down anyone who wants to say that they got it this way or that.  In fact, I think it is important to look into it- not so much for we who have already crossed over into Pozville, but for those who haven't to be better armed to protect themselves.

I just keep wanting to see something, ANYTHING concrete to back up this kind of declaration.  There appears to be science to support the other side of the argument.  I'm waiting to see it for statements like these as well.

One thing about this thread and posts like that one:  It will likely make AM more of a one-stop shop for all things HIV.  Folks will be able to get unsubstantiated fear fodder completely in-house.  No need to shop at The Body for it or anything.

Hey Hunter,

There is NO evidence that transmission is impossible via oral routes (for the sucker, not the suckee...), therefore you have no documented evidence to prove it isn't possible.  You see -- we are now in a circle.  There is no concrete evidence that it is possible and none that it is not possible.  Now I happen to agree with the vast majority of people in this thread (and a number of highly regarded doctors) that while it may be possible, it is probably very, very rare.  Clearly, the science points to it being exceedingly rare (because, remember, no study that I've read says it is impossible).

I will say once again -- one should never use anecdotes to make a sweeping assumption -- but neither can you discount anecdotes completely, because these anecdotes are pretty much the same thing as "outliers" that are found in "peer reviewed studies".  Just because it is an anecdote doesn't mean it isn't true.  People are unique and what might not happen to the vast majority of people, might happen to one or two.  This isn't black and white and, dare I say, medicine isn't black and white.

We are back to folks needing to take note of ALL DATA and figure out where there comfort level is with "risks".


Mike
Atripla - Started 12/05
Reyataz/Norvir - Added 6/06
Labs - Pre-Meds
Sep05 T=350/25% VL98,559
Nov05 288/18%  47,564
Current Labs
May2013 691/31% <20

Offline Central79

  • Member
  • Posts: 527
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #154 on: March 24, 2007, 01:07:24 PM »

No, I haven't heard evidence.  I've heard anecdotes.  And we're back to anecdote < evidence.  I am not saying your testimonials are "nothing", but I don't believe they carry the same weight as information collected from careful study.

Just to illustrate what I am saying:  If I came on here and said, "I got HIV from a mosquito.  I am certain that is what happened."  Would my saying that automatically qualify that statement to have equal footing as documented research that would contradict such a claim? 


Actually, what we've put together here is a case series - which is a level of evidence as described by the Centre for Evidence Based Medicine (CEBM), coming in at Level 4. Whilst it's not a systematic review, it is evidence.

Troubling case reports that don't quite fit are where a lot of randomised control trials and systematic reviews come from.

To use your mosquito analogy, which incidentally further belittles the testimony you've heard here, if you came on here and said that I'd say you were nuts. If another person joined you I'd think they were taking the piss. Another would stop and make me think. Furthermore, if I had friends who were convinced they had gotten HIV from a mosquito, and if there was a reasonable physiological explanation for that happening I'd want to do an RCT. All of these things exist with oral transmission of HIV.

Speaking of which, I've just been looking at the references originally cited by Jonathan. In particular this one:

Sexual risk behavior and risk factors for HIV-1 seroconversion in homosexual men participating in the Tricontinental Seroconverter Study, 1982-1994.

Published in the American Journal of Epideimiology, Dec 15 1997. I can't understand why this has been given as a reference against oral transmission of HIV to the receptive partner, because just from the abstract it seems that oral receptive intercourse is independently associated with an increased incidence of seroconversion in men with no history of anal sex, or just with one partner. I quote:

"To more carefully examine risk associated with receptive oral intercourse, analyses were done in a subgroup of men who reported no or one receptive anal intercourse partner. The risk (OR) associated with receptive oral intercourse partner increase was 1.05 (95% CI 1.0-1.11)."

The odds-ratio >1 means that it's more likely to happen in this group, and the CI, although it =1at its lower end is more than likely to be statistically significant. The abstract concludes:

"Although the prevalence of major risk factors has decreased over time, the associations of these behaviors and HIV infection persist, suggesting that these risk behaviors remain important avenues for public health interventions."

If anything, this study is showing that oral transmission is a very real possibility, and opening the door to further studies.

M
« Last Edit: March 24, 2007, 01:10:08 PM by Matt Mee »
Diagnosed January 2006
26/1/06 - 860 (22%), VL > 500,000
24/4/06 - 820 (24.6%), VL 158,000
13/7/06 - 840 (22%), VL 268,000
1/11/06 - 680 (21%), VL 93,100
29/1/07 - 1,020 (27.5%), VL 46,500
15/5/07 - 1,140 (22.8%), VL not done.
13/10/07 - 759 (23.2%), VL 170,000
6/11/07 - 630 (25%), VL 19,324
14/1/08 - 650 (21%), VL 16,192
15/4/08 - 590 (21%), VL 40, 832

Offline thunter34

  • Member
  • Posts: 7,314
  • His name is Carl.
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #155 on: March 24, 2007, 01:23:19 PM »
"Further belittles the testimony" on here, my fanny.  As was CLEARLY STATED there, that scenario was used to illustrate to inequality between the weight of anecdotal evidence and information gathered through careful study.  It does not have equal weight.  It WILL not have equal weight until there is data behind it. 

There are millions of people ready to testify the truth of any given religious doctrine.  That doesn't make any single one of them so.  Lots of people will swear to UFO's and alien abductions as well.  Show me.  And there currently isn't any 100% evidence that that is impossible either, but I'm still going to maintain my skepticism.  My issue isn't with saying something is or isn't theoretically possible.  It's with this mentality that simply having enough people tell something makes it acquire increased levels of truth.
AIDS isn't for sissies.

Offline Central79

  • Member
  • Posts: 527
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #156 on: March 24, 2007, 01:31:59 PM »
It belittled it by equating the opinion of forum members on this subject with getting HIV from a mosquito. It's calling people liars but with more words.

I notice you didn't comment on the abstract, which would appear to contradict both your arguement, and the purposes for which it has been quoted previously. And that is data in that paper, whichever way you want to cut it, and no number of lazy metaphors are going to change that.

As I've said previously. I don't think this mode of transmission is likely, or probable. But it does happen - and as (and if) people get the message about safe sex more and more, this mode of transmission is going to become proportionally greater. Get used to it.

M.
Diagnosed January 2006
26/1/06 - 860 (22%), VL > 500,000
24/4/06 - 820 (24.6%), VL 158,000
13/7/06 - 840 (22%), VL 268,000
1/11/06 - 680 (21%), VL 93,100
29/1/07 - 1,020 (27.5%), VL 46,500
15/5/07 - 1,140 (22.8%), VL not done.
13/10/07 - 759 (23.2%), VL 170,000
6/11/07 - 630 (25%), VL 19,324
14/1/08 - 650 (21%), VL 16,192
15/4/08 - 590 (21%), VL 40, 832

Offline thunter34

  • Member
  • Posts: 7,314
  • His name is Carl.
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #157 on: March 24, 2007, 01:46:31 PM »
I haven't commented on the abstract because I haven't had a chance to read through it yet.  I'm doing other things in addition to this here- not living and dying by what is getting posted in this thread.

And "lazy metaphors"?  Who is belittling who here?  I've said two or three times now that I am not dismissing theoretical possibility outright.  I'm dismissing the idea that something acquires an increased truth just by the amount of people willing to swear by it.  The mere telling doesn't make something so. 

And to continue with the lazy metaphors:  At least with alien abductions, I suspect people are more forthcoming about being anally probed than some are being on here.

I haven't called anyone a "liar".  I've merely said that I wished to err on the side that had more available documentation supporting it.  And that talk does not directly equal data.  That's all. 
« Last Edit: March 24, 2007, 01:48:40 PM by thunter34 »
AIDS isn't for sissies.

Offline Bucko

  • Member
  • Posts: 1,947
  • You need a shine, missy!
    • The Spin Cycle
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #158 on: March 24, 2007, 01:47:32 PM »
It belittled it by equating the opinion of forum members on this subject with getting HIV from a mosquito. It's calling people liars but with more words.

I notice you didn't comment on the abstract, which would appear to contradict both your arguement, and the purposes for which it has been quoted previously. And that is data in that paper, whichever way you want to cut it, and no number of lazy metaphors are going to change that.

As I've said previously. I don't think this mode of transmission is likely, or probable. But it does happen - and as (and if) people get the message about safe sex more and more, this mode of transmission is going to become proportionally greater. Get used to it.

M.

Calling someone lazy isn't the nicest way to approach a discussion either, Matt.

The reason why the study you quoted from is used as an illustration of the minimal of definable risk is because none of the negative participants seroconverted.

Nothing in science is 100%, because the door is always left open for the consideration of additional data which may or may not alter the thesis. This does not mean that its application is subjective, which by definition is the reverse of the scientific approach.

We owe science enormous debts in the age and societies in which we live, the meds being perhaps the most obvious example.

And I gotta say that the absence of evidence is not evidence. One can prove that something happened, but can never prove that something did not.

Brent
(Who lives in the modern world)
Blessed with brains, talent and gorgeous tits.

The revolutionary smart set reads The Spin Cycle at least once every day.

Blathering on AIDSmeds since 2005, provocative from birth

Offline milker

  • Member
  • Posts: 4,034
  • Protected phone sex
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #159 on: March 24, 2007, 01:48:02 PM »
This thread is getting tense again..  :'(

Milker.
mid-dec: stupid ass
mid-jan: seroconversion
mid-feb: poz
mar 07: cd4 432 (35%) vl 54000
may 07: cd4 399 (28%) vl 27760
jul 07: cd4 403 (26%) vl 99241
oct 07: cd4 353 (24%) vl 29993
jan 08: cd4 332 (26%) vl 33308
mar 08: cd4 392 (23%) vl 75548
jun 08: cd4 325 (27%) vl 45880
oct 08: cd4 197 (20%) vl 154000 <== aids diagnosis
nov 2 08 start Atripla
nov 30 08: cd4 478 (23%) vl 1880 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
feb 19 09: cd4 398 (24%) vl 430 getting there!
apr 23 09: cd4 604 (29%) vl 50 woohoo :D :D
jul 30 09: cd4 512 (29%) vl undetectable :D :D
may 27 10: cd4 655 (32%) vl undetectable :D :D

Now accepting applications from blowjob ninjas™

Offline Andy Velez

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • Posts: 24,686
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #160 on: March 24, 2007, 02:07:37 PM »
YO! Milker is right. Things are heating up here again after simply exchanging ideas and opinions for a while.

Matt, I don't see where those who have expressed the idea that giving oral can be risky have either actually or by inference been called liars. So let's not go THERE any further with hackles raised and raising verbally.

Ditto with terms like "lazy." This is not scientific but I don't need to do a study to know that it's likely to light flames.

Clearly there are passionately held opinions here. In some ways I don't see they are actually so far apart or at least not altogether so.

One opinion seems to lend a bit more forceful weight to anecdotal reporting than another, especially in terms of numbers, but neither seems to have ruled out the need for more serious study and consideration  of the issue.

Andy Velez

Offline Val

  • Member
  • Posts: 938
  • Praxitèles -- Satyre au repos
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #161 on: March 24, 2007, 02:12:06 PM »
I would love to hear something from some other people who PMd me saying they were infected by giving head... And, no, I think the discussion is quite civilised!  After all, we're only humans!   And men!  Not little demoiselles!

Val
___
___

P.S. I think this thread has definitely gone  "underground".

Edited to add the P.S. (as usual):))
« Last Edit: March 24, 2007, 02:20:09 PM by Val »
Arthus Bertrand
http://www.yannarthusbertrand.com/yann2/affichage.php?reference=TVDC%20YABFR084&pais=France
Ali Mahdavi
http://asyoudesireme.online.fr/index.htm
Richard de Chazal
http://www.richarddechazal.com/
Daniel Nassoy
http://www.danielnassoy.com/pages/galeries_portraits_2.html
Photography:
The word comes from the Greek words φως phos ("light"), and γραφίς graphis ("stylus", "paintbrush") or γραφή graphê, together meaning "drawing with light" or "representation by means of lines".

Offline bocker3

  • Member
  • Posts: 3,386
  • You gotta enjoy life......
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #162 on: March 24, 2007, 02:34:12 PM »
This does not mean that its application is subjective, which by definition is the reverse of the scientific approach.

Brent,
I don't think this is exactly true.  The underlying data may be objective, but few see all the underlying data.  What most see is the interpretation of the underlying data, which is subjective.  We have all seen different people present the same study differently simply by how you frame "the question" and/or the statistics that you use.  So while I do agree with your overall point, I'm afraid that science isn't as black and white as we might like.

And I gotta say that the absence of evidence is not evidence. One can prove that something happened, but can never prove that something did not.

You are absolutely correct here.  So how can anyone say that people have NOT gotten HIV from oral sex? 
Now I'm not saying you said this, because I don't think you did, but others are certainly implying that perhaps some aren't forthcoming on whether they've had anal sex as a risk factor.

I will say again, I think oral transmission is possible but rare -- and like Andy stated, that isn't that far off from what most are saying on here. 
I wonder if this causes such angst in some because it makes them have to reconsider some of the "risk" that they feel is acceptable in their sex lives??  I think this is a very good discussion to be having not because it's important how someone got infected, but because it is important that people keep reassessing what risks they are comfortable with and which they are not.  I know that my partner and I had another discussion on oral sex last night -- we're still in the same place, but the discussion was good.  And for that, I need to thank everyone who has posted in this thread. 
Of course, we discussed so long, that we didn't get to "practice" anything........   :'(  ::)

Hugs,
Mike
Atripla - Started 12/05
Reyataz/Norvir - Added 6/06
Labs - Pre-Meds
Sep05 T=350/25% VL98,559
Nov05 288/18%  47,564
Current Labs
May2013 691/31% <20

Offline Val

  • Member
  • Posts: 938
  • Praxitèles -- Satyre au repos
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #163 on: March 24, 2007, 02:38:54 PM »

Of course, we discussed so long, that we didn't get to "practice" anything........   :'(  ::)

Lovely!  ;) ;D ::) :-*

Arthus Bertrand
http://www.yannarthusbertrand.com/yann2/affichage.php?reference=TVDC%20YABFR084&pais=France
Ali Mahdavi
http://asyoudesireme.online.fr/index.htm
Richard de Chazal
http://www.richarddechazal.com/
Daniel Nassoy
http://www.danielnassoy.com/pages/galeries_portraits_2.html
Photography:
The word comes from the Greek words φως phos ("light"), and γραφίς graphis ("stylus", "paintbrush") or γραφή graphê, together meaning "drawing with light" or "representation by means of lines".

Offline bocker3

  • Member
  • Posts: 3,386
  • You gotta enjoy life......
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #164 on: March 24, 2007, 02:40:38 PM »
Lovely!  ;) ;D ::) :-*

Ah, yes -- but tonite, is another matter -- He had best put out!!   ;D
Atripla - Started 12/05
Reyataz/Norvir - Added 6/06
Labs - Pre-Meds
Sep05 T=350/25% VL98,559
Nov05 288/18%  47,564
Current Labs
May2013 691/31% <20

Offline Bucko

  • Member
  • Posts: 1,947
  • You need a shine, missy!
    • The Spin Cycle
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #165 on: March 24, 2007, 02:49:00 PM »
Brent,
I don't think this is exactly true.  The underlying data may be objective, but few see all the underlying data.  What most see is the interpretation of the underlying data, which is subjective.  We have all seen different people present the same study differently simply by how you frame "the question" and/or the statistics that you use.  So while I do agree with your overall point, I'm afraid that science isn't as black and white as we might like.

You are absolutely correct here.  So how can anyone say that people have NOT gotten HIV from oral sex? 
Now I'm not saying you said this, because I don't think you did, but others are certainly implying that perhaps some aren't forthcoming on whether they've had anal sex as a risk factor.

I will say again, I think oral transmission is possible but rare -- and like Andy stated, that isn't that far off from what most are saying on here. 
I wonder if this causes such angst in some because it makes them have to reconsider some of the "risk" that they feel is acceptable in their sex lives??  I think this is a very good discussion to be having not because it's important how someone got infected, but because it is important that people keep reassessing what risks they are comfortable with and which they are not.  I know that my partner and I had another discussion on oral sex last night -- we're still in the same place, but the discussion was good.  And for that, I need to thank everyone who has posted in this thread. 
Of course, we discussed so long, that we didn't get to "practice" anything........   :'(  ::)

Hugs,
Mike


Mike-

It goes without saying that any human construct will have all the limitations of humanity present. And I've said before that any thesis that cannot accommodate doubt is dogma, which I find abhorrent

I know that, given enough time, energy and interest, nearly anything can be scientifically shown to be feasible, but with astronomically low probability. Does this constitute enough evidence to cause a shift in the prevailing paradigm?

Risk, contained in quotes or otherwise, really is about the choices we make in our lives. I personally choose higher-risk activities for myself for many reasons. But I serosort to minimize the potential risks in others and eliminate any risk in infecting a neg. Big boys make their own assessments and live with the consequences of their risks.

Brent
(Who owns what he posts)
Blessed with brains, talent and gorgeous tits.

The revolutionary smart set reads The Spin Cycle at least once every day.

Blathering on AIDSmeds since 2005, provocative from birth

Offline bocker3

  • Member
  • Posts: 3,386
  • You gotta enjoy life......
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #166 on: March 24, 2007, 02:59:50 PM »
Brent,

I agree with you completely - expecially around everyone's individual choices.  I am not trying to argue a change in any prevailing paradigm.  I have only continued to post in here because I do get a little ruffled when folks simply dismiss others out of hand.  When people say that "science proves them wrong", which is not really the case.  Science is simply showing that their assertion happens rarely.
Again -- I have not seen you do that, so this isn't pointed at you.

Mike
Atripla - Started 12/05
Reyataz/Norvir - Added 6/06
Labs - Pre-Meds
Sep05 T=350/25% VL98,559
Nov05 288/18%  47,564
Current Labs
May2013 691/31% <20

Offline Bucko

  • Member
  • Posts: 1,947
  • You need a shine, missy!
    • The Spin Cycle
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #167 on: March 24, 2007, 03:11:40 PM »
Mike-

As my personal opinions in this will only fan the flames higher, I've refrained. That doesn't mean that I don't have any  ;D ;)

If I were in a serodiscordant relationship I'm not sure what I'd do. Truth be told, getting a blowjob isn't one of my top-ten pleasures anyway, at least with so many rank ammeters professing competence in the field. Edmond White one wrote that "it's more of a vocation than a real job".

Brent
(Who has other agendas to pursue)
Blessed with brains, talent and gorgeous tits.

The revolutionary smart set reads The Spin Cycle at least once every day.

Blathering on AIDSmeds since 2005, provocative from birth

Offline thunter34

  • Member
  • Posts: 7,314
  • His name is Carl.
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #168 on: March 24, 2007, 03:36:23 PM »
I'm on the same page as Brent...or at least reading from the same trashy magazine.  The debate of does it or doesn't it happen matters not a whit where my personal sex life is concerned.  You won't see a wrapped BJ with me- period.  I'll state that outright. 

And I've never said here that "science proves you wrong".  I've only said that I sure would like to see some science to prove 'em right.  And that the mere telling and retelling does not equate to what I define as evidence. 

I agree that this is an important discussion.  I said so above when I said it matters most of all to the negative world so they could make the most informed decisions.  I only said that anecdotal scenarios would not be enough for me to alter how I would present the risk assessment to others.  If there is more concrete support for this, it's time to ante up.
AIDS isn't for sissies.

Offline keyite

  • Member
  • Posts: 514
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #169 on: March 24, 2007, 03:55:38 PM »
I should no doubt leave this alone, but I just can't help wondering: public health authorities, HIV prevention agencies, ID and other doctors across the world all appear to deem oral sex (giving it, not receiving it) a LOW risk. Contrast that with kissing or indeed mosquito bites which they categorically deem NO risk.

Why is that? Global conspiracy or have they simply not yet caught up with Jonathan's selection of publications?

Offline water duck

  • Member
  • Posts: 397
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #170 on: March 24, 2007, 07:04:32 PM »
I told my story to the doctor at the hospital where i am being followed. She believed my story, she had since been successful in inserting that there is a risk factor in fellatio on the flyer about HIV prevention. She started campaigning this message, she approached a leading figure in the gay world to help her get the message across, she was rejected as the other person did not want to start a panic.
Remind me of the person who first wanted the world to know that  it is round !!

Keyite, if you want your message to have following and support , please do not mention any names !!
Mentioning of 'Jonathan' is wrong, singleing him out will start another war !! i am sure you do not want that as we are all here to do mature discussion.

Be well , be health , be happy !! Live today  ;)

Siang
« Last Edit: March 24, 2007, 07:07:48 PM by water duck »

Offline thunter34

  • Member
  • Posts: 7,314
  • His name is Carl.
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #171 on: March 24, 2007, 07:17:58 PM »
I should no doubt leave this alone, but I just can't help wondering: public health authorities, HIV prevention agencies, ID and other doctors across the world all appear to deem oral sex (giving it, not receiving it) a LOW risk. Contrast that with kissing or indeed mosquito bites which they categorically deem NO risk.

Why is that? Global conspiracy or have they simply not yet caught up with Jonathan's selection of publications?

There has already been conclusive study to determine that kissing and mosquitos are not of risk...and yes, YES already- the nature of oral sex makes it a different event than kissing or getting bitten by a mosquito.  So no, there is no Global Conspiracy- and I imagine they are all caught up with J's reading list.  Apparently, I must explain this bit once again:  I was using that mosquito scenario to illustrate my argument against giving anecdote the same weight as reviewed data.

I said before that it shouldn't have the same wieght and I still say so.  Just like I don't put much weight into the reports that there are now numbers coming forth through PM to also say they had the whammy put on them by giving head.  I'll acknowledge that when they say so publicly.  And I don't buy that people are "too scared" to come forth and say so in this thread for fear of reproach from others.  Like Matty said, has it really come to this?  I haven't seen anything in this thread yet that would warrant anything like that, but maybe I'm tougher than most about such things.  If that is the case, I really feel for them.  They will undoubtably have a tough go of it not only in the HIV realm but with life in general if they can be cowed into corners that easily.
AIDS isn't for sissies.

Offline keyite

  • Member
  • Posts: 514
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #172 on: March 24, 2007, 07:43:12 PM »
So no, there is no Global Conspiracy- and I imagine they are all caught up with J's reading list.

Thanks, that clarifies.

I'll acknowledge that when they say so publicly.

Four, possibly five (not entirely sure if that was Siang's intention), have done exactly that.

Offline thunter34

  • Member
  • Posts: 7,314
  • His name is Carl.
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #173 on: March 24, 2007, 07:47:03 PM »
Thanks, that clarifies.

Four, possibly five (not entirely sure if that was Siang's intention), have done exactly that.

Hereby acknowledged for the few that have stated so in this thread. 

I acknowledge that these people have made this claim.
AIDS isn't for sissies.

Offline aupointillimite

  • Member
  • Posts: 3,229
  • FUS DO RAH!
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #174 on: March 24, 2007, 07:49:26 PM »
Hereby acknowledged for the few that have stated so in this thread. 

I acknowledge that these people have made this claim.

Are they gonna be knighted?
Your tastebuds can't repel flavor of this magnitude!

Offline water duck

  • Member
  • Posts: 397
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #175 on: March 24, 2007, 07:51:23 PM »
thunter, it is not being 'too sacred' that matters;

it is being ridicule that counts.

Siang

Offline thunter34

  • Member
  • Posts: 7,314
  • His name is Carl.
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #176 on: March 24, 2007, 08:02:11 PM »
thunter, it is not being 'too sacred' that matters;

it is being ridicule that counts.

Siang


huh?

do you mean too "scared" and ridiculed ?

even so....the same thing i said before in that regard holds true, in my opinion.  if people are too intimidated to even speak out for themselves on a web board, for heaven's sake, then it doesn't bode well for their ability to fend for themselves in the world at large.  (again...in my opinion.)
AIDS isn't for sissies.

Offline thunter34

  • Member
  • Posts: 7,314
  • His name is Carl.
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #177 on: March 24, 2007, 08:02:52 PM »
Are they gonna be knighted?

No. 

Most of them are already Queens to begin with.
AIDS isn't for sissies.

Offline aupointillimite

  • Member
  • Posts: 3,229
  • FUS DO RAH!
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #178 on: March 24, 2007, 08:08:07 PM »
No. 

Most of them are already Queens to begin with.

It does feel rather Buckingham-ish around here from time to time, doesn't it?
Your tastebuds can't repel flavor of this magnitude!

Offline keyite

  • Member
  • Posts: 514
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #179 on: March 24, 2007, 09:00:44 PM »
Hereby acknowledged for the few that have stated so in this thread. 

I acknowledge that these people have made this claim.

Thanks. I, for one, feel very acknowledged. ;D

Offline otherplaces

  • Member
  • Posts: 398
  • Mutant Super Hero
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #180 on: March 24, 2007, 09:39:45 PM »

Is it really any wonder why some people wouldn't want to engage in the type of back and forth we have witnessed on this topic?  I have abstained mainly because these days this topic isn't really why I come here, not that it isn't important, but I come here to try and give some support where I can, and gain support from other's experiences.  That is the reason I PM'd Keyite...to let him know that I believed him, and had a similar experience, and to let him know he was by no means alone in this or any other way.  And I'll say Keyite has done just fine without me posting.

I'll also say that this is the closest I've ever seen the board come to an actual civil discussion on this topic, but it did seem to take a bit of time to get there.  I'm hoping it can stay in the civil realm, but I see no need to 'call people out'.  I have a feeling we're all plenty strong enough to deal with HIV in the real world whether we post on this topic or not.

Most of all I'd like to emphasize what has been noted a few times...that despite the heated exchange there is quite a large area of agreement on the topic by everyone.  The different prevailing positions really aren't very far apart.

Lastly, my resolve not to get involved in a back and forth on this topic is very real, so I'll say now that this will be my only post in this topic.

much love and support,
brian






Offline David_CA

  • Member
  • Posts: 3,246
  • Joined: March 2006
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #181 on: March 24, 2007, 11:58:19 PM »
Oh for Heaven's sake, just suck the damned dick and either take it out of your mouth before the guy comes or squeeze it at the base and no semen will come out.  It won't be much different than sucking a big (hopefully) finger done this way.  Besides, some people are so bad at giving a blow job that they don't even need to worry about becoming infected this way.

Black Friday 03-03-2006
03-23-06 CD4 359 @27.4% VL 75,938
06-01-06 CD4 462 @24.3% VL > 100,000
08-15-06 CD4 388 @22.8% VL >  "
10-21-06 CD4 285 @21.9% VL >  "
  Atripla started 12-01-2006
01-08-07 CD4 429 @26.8% VL 1872!
05-08-07 CD4 478 @28.1% VL 740
08-03-07 CD4 509 @31.8% VL 370
11-06-07 CD4 570 @30.0% VL 140
02-21-08 CD4 648 @32.4% VL 600
05-19-08 CD4 695 @33.1% VL < 48 undetectable!
08-21-08 CD4 725 @34.5%
11-11-08 CD4 672 @39.5%
02-11-09 CD4 773 @36.8%
05-11-09 CD4 615 @36.2%
08-19-09 CD4 770 @38.5%
11-19-09 CD4 944 @33.7%
02-17-10 CD4 678 @39.9%  
06-03-10 CD4 768 @34.9%
09-21-10 CD4 685 @40.3%
01-10-11 CD4 908 @36.3%
05-23-11 CD4 846 @36.8% VL 80
02-13-12 CD4 911 @41.4% VL<20
You must be the change you want to see in the world.  Mahatma Gandhi

Offline Central79

  • Member
  • Posts: 527
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #182 on: March 25, 2007, 11:39:34 AM »
Okay - I apologise for using the adjective "lazy". It was inflammatory and ill thought out.

I do feel quite strongly about this subject, and the word "liar" and a few more inflammatory labels were bandied about in the direction of Keyite at the beginning of this thread. Equally, I feel that acknowledging a theoretical possibility one moment, and then equating that possibility to infection via a mosquito, or alien abduction, is disingenuous.

Confining myself to the science, although I haven't read the paper I mentioned earlier as I have lost my Athens password, it took me 30 seconds to read the abstract on pubmed. If none of the people in the study had seroconverted after they controlled for factors via anal sex, then it would have been impossible to get an odds-ratio >1, which was mentioned in the abstract. I would urge people to read this abstract, and comment.

I'm not denying that I had anal sex in the window period before seroconversion, but my experience leads me to the inescapable conclusion that either HIV can be transmitted (rarely) orally, or condoms are not 100%.  Now I know condoms work.  I was careful, but unaware of the risk oral sex posed to me. Too be honest, I'd rather hold the contrary view - as I would worry less about my partner. As it is, I tend to steer clear of the "Am I Infected?" forum, as I have a much lower threshold in my risk assessment than Andy and the others - a product of my experience, which isn't justified in 99% of the people asking for advice.

Once again, I'm sorry if I offended anybody. I'm much happier debating the science. And I would welcome opinions on the paper cited earlier in the thread.

M.
Diagnosed January 2006
26/1/06 - 860 (22%), VL > 500,000
24/4/06 - 820 (24.6%), VL 158,000
13/7/06 - 840 (22%), VL 268,000
1/11/06 - 680 (21%), VL 93,100
29/1/07 - 1,020 (27.5%), VL 46,500
15/5/07 - 1,140 (22.8%), VL not done.
13/10/07 - 759 (23.2%), VL 170,000
6/11/07 - 630 (25%), VL 19,324
14/1/08 - 650 (21%), VL 16,192
15/4/08 - 590 (21%), VL 40, 832

Offline thunter34

  • Member
  • Posts: 7,314
  • His name is Carl.
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #183 on: March 25, 2007, 01:16:38 PM »
One last time:  I was not equating a theoretical possibility to the mosquito scenario.  As I have said like three times now already, I was using that to illustrate my assertion of why simple anecdotal evidence does NOT hold the same weight as data.  I also used the examples of religion and alien abductions- just that having several people swear to something doesn't make it so. 
AIDS isn't for sissies.

Offline Central79

  • Member
  • Posts: 527
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #184 on: March 25, 2007, 02:04:41 PM »
Sigh.

Okay, I'm going to unlock my jaw from this thread now. I have this virus in my blood, and I know how it got there. If you can't see that this is not analagous to mosquitoes, the existance of God, or alien abduction than I'm not going to continue to point out why it isn't so.

I've tried moving this debate on to talk about data. As you persist in not commenting about it, I can only assume that I've run into some entrenched belief of yours that is not amenable to reason, or discussion.

I will continue to represent my point of view, and those of a significant minority of forum members, in the future. I don't feel that the view "you can't get HIV from giving a blowjob" is right, and I will challenge it where I find it.

M.
Diagnosed January 2006
26/1/06 - 860 (22%), VL > 500,000
24/4/06 - 820 (24.6%), VL 158,000
13/7/06 - 840 (22%), VL 268,000
1/11/06 - 680 (21%), VL 93,100
29/1/07 - 1,020 (27.5%), VL 46,500
15/5/07 - 1,140 (22.8%), VL not done.
13/10/07 - 759 (23.2%), VL 170,000
6/11/07 - 630 (25%), VL 19,324
14/1/08 - 650 (21%), VL 16,192
15/4/08 - 590 (21%), VL 40, 832

Offline thunter34

  • Member
  • Posts: 7,314
  • His name is Carl.
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #185 on: March 25, 2007, 04:06:09 PM »
"Sigh" is right.  How you have somehow managed to remain unable to comprehend what I was illustrating is beyond me.  Especially since I have taken pains to clarify it several times now.  I will strip away all adornment to my statements and gear it down even lower for you.  Maybe this time it will click.


Now...without metaphors, similes, allegory or any other type of illustration technique:


Anecdote does not equal concrete data, and a claim doesn't become truth based on the number of people willing to repeat it.

There.  No mosquitos, deities or space aliens.  Has that at last simplified it enough? 
« Last Edit: March 25, 2007, 09:15:41 PM by thunter34 »
AIDS isn't for sissies.

Offline thunter34

  • Member
  • Posts: 7,314
  • His name is Carl.
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #186 on: March 25, 2007, 04:15:45 PM »
And I am completely amenable to reason and discussion.  As for the commenting on the data, that has since already been done well enough in Brent's and other's post right below that.  There's no need to rehash it right back again. 

I have no partiular entrenched belief here other than the one right above this post- the one about anecdotes right above that I hope all have grasped by now. 

And speaking of "no need to rehash"....this thread is TIRED now.  Beyond tired.  I've said all I have to say on the matter, and I think most have.  But to review for the slower members of the class:

- I never completely disputed theoretical possibility, just giving too much credence to anecdotal evidence

- I never equated oral transmission scenarios with mosquitos, God or E.T.   I just used those things to try to illustrate a point about anecdotes, but apparently that somehow flew too far over the heads of a few.

Moving on to fresher, better threads...
AIDS isn't for sissies.

Offline keyite

  • Member
  • Posts: 514
Re: Infected via oral sex - am I barking mad?
« Reply #187 on: March 25, 2007, 05:39:51 PM »
Confining myself to the science, although I haven't read the paper I mentioned earlier as I have lost my Athens password, it took me 30 seconds to read the abstract on pubmed. If none of the people in the study had seroconverted after they controlled for factors via anal sex, then it would have been impossible to get an odds-ratio >1, which was mentioned in the abstract. I would urge people to read this abstract, and comment.

Matt, thanks for that. Seems pretty clear to me.

 


Terms of Membership for these forums
 

© 2014 Smart + Strong. All Rights Reserved.   terms of use and your privacy
Smart + Strong® is a registered trademark of CDM Publishing, LLC.