Author Topic: condoms, oil and testing (Read 10345 times)

jambo · « **on:** May 18, 2007, 11:21:50 am »

i am a newbie here, but first i must say this is a wonderful forum. a pity i only found it yesterday when i was not happy with a few other similar forums that i visit...ann,velez, rapidrod and group, i am sure you realize the great service you guys are doing to this big community of pos and worried wells. keep going guys!

i am not sure i have much to ask. i have seen the posts here and in other forum and have received pretty much the same replies. had vaginal sex with a woman i dont know, with condom but by mistake, after having put oil on penis! forgot this basic rule. however, condom did not break, at least i did not notice anything and i ejaculated outside in my own view and saw sperm happily inside the condom and not leaking or anything. so, huh, nothing to worry, no need to test is what i received in response to questions. all fine upto now. 2weeks since the incident, almost, no ars type symptoms to freak me out (maybe they'll appear next week

)

now since yesterday, in my paranoia i have been visiting the just tested forums. and wham! what do i find? more than one post from people who say they were infected despite following safer sex habits, like always using condoms!!! what the hell!!! how can this happen?

should i believe posts from people i dont know at all, or dismiss these claims as many of you suggest. somehow these thoughts dont leave me.

also, cannot find anyone giving their opinion on the utility of a 4wk antibody test. why does NY health deptt say 99% of people will show detectable antibodies by 4 weeks, and a few other websites concur with this.

i know all this makes no sense, why am i posting at all? maybe just to put words to extremely messed up thoughts in an anxious period of life. thank you for reading this rant...
jambo

RapidRod · « **Reply #1 on:** May 18, 2007, 12:40:33 pm »

Show us one antibody test that is approved and says it is reliable under the 3 month guidelines for someone that has been recently exposed?

Andy Velez · « **Reply #2 on:** May 18, 2007, 12:43:20 pm »

Jam, essentially you are worrying needlessly. You used a condom. Excellent. You used a non-water based lube on your penis. Not good. Fortunately the condom didn't break. (Your ejaculating is totally irrelevant to the situation as far as any risk to your health is concerned). And believe me, if the condom had broken you would have known it. It's not a subtle event when that happens. It's not like there'd be a teeny tiny hole you'd
somehow miss. When a condom fails it looks like a fringed hula hoop on your johnson.

So bottom line is keep using those condoms and make sure in the future that if you use a lube, it's always a water-based one.

This time out there's no cause for concern nor for testing.

As far as your other "readings," I can't account for what you are coming up with. It certainly doesn't make sense in terms of any basis in HIV science. Surfing the net in that manner will only fuel your worst fears and all to no good purpose. You don't have an HIV problem so lay off of that surfing is my suggestion.

Cheers,

jambo · « **Reply #3 on:** May 18, 2007, 11:34:58 pm »

Hey Andy

i really value your coments, they are direct and very sensible (when i am out of my senses!)

. yeah i know i need to stay away from this damn internet surfing syndrome. i wish there are more folks like you and rapidrod who are willing to spend their time and energy against this virus and all the stigma that goes with it. education is really the key, isnt it, for youth and grown ups alike.

love you guys, keep up your work, no amount of praise or money can value the real worth of what your doing.
jambo

Andy Velez · « **Reply #4 on:** May 19, 2007, 08:47:21 am »

I'm glad you found the exchanges to be helpful, Jam.

Now just keep those latex condoms handy and use one everytime you have intercourse.

Cheers,

jambo · « **Reply #5 on:** May 19, 2007, 10:51:39 am »

you bet i will...u know we worried wells will always go ahead and test for peace of mind, and i dont think theres anything wrong with that, but sites such as yours keep us sane and give the right info when it is desperately needed.

i know i will stay connected, hiv or not.
jambo

jambo · « **Reply #6 on:** May 20, 2007, 06:04:04 am »

andy and others

sorry i am back with a question. on this site i have come across two posts where people say they have followed the safer sex guidelines, and one says he never had intercourse without a condom. both posters have said they have tested pos and have also posted subsequent numbers on viral load and cd counts. i know some of you have doubted whether these posts are authentic.

it is worrying me. i know this is internet so you dont know what is there at the other end, but something like this freaks out guys like me who are being told they were ok and dont need testing. i believe you fully but there are times that frightening thoughts occur, like what if the two posters are right.

sorry guys will understand if this is getting repititive and on the lines of the often discussed threads.
jambo

RapidRod · « **Reply #7 on:** May 20, 2007, 07:16:56 am »

jambo STOP, don't even start.

Ann · « **Reply #8 on:** May 20, 2007, 07:45:52 am »

Jambo,

I've seen THOUSANDS of people in the same situation as you here in the Am I forum - and none of them tested positive. Keep that in mind and forget about the handful of people who claim they got infected despite safer sex. Chances are they either aren't being totally truthful, or they've forgotten something they did under the influence of drugs and/or alcohol.

While you do not need testing over this specific incident, anyone who is sexually active should be having a full sexual health care check-up, including but not limited to hiv testing, at least once a year and more often if unprotected intercourse occurs.

If you aren't already having regular, routine check-ups, now is the time to start. As long as you make sure condoms are being used for intercourse, you can fully expect your routine hiv tests to return with negative results. Don't forget to always get checked for all the other sexually transmitted infections as well, because they are MUCH easier to transmit than hiv.

Ann

jambo · « **Reply #9 on:** May 20, 2007, 11:52:18 am »

Ann great response, puts my mind at ease, thanks a zillion.

Rapidrod, thanks and i promise to try my best not to start this discussion.

guys thank you, you probably know how much it means to me, take care

jambo

jambo · « **Reply #10 on:** June 03, 2007, 11:17:40 pm »

so after 4 weeks of reading every thread here, i went for a test. this is only at 4 weeks so not at all conclusive. but since all of you have reassured me i am expecting the result to be neg. perhaps one more test until 12 weeks is all that may be needed. the doc cannot give me the result immediately he says the rapid test strip was in the regrigerator and he needs to bring it down to room temp so he will tell me the result after a few hours. i am keeping my fingers crossed. trying to tell myself that there was no risk and i did not need to test as told by every one here so it has to come out neg. i will post again on receiving the result.

jambo · « **Reply #11 on:** June 04, 2007, 03:05:47 am »

neg at 4wks. i will need to have the worst luck i guess to have been infected via protected sex, have no symptoms at all and a neg test at this time, all turn into pos in a few weeks. never really a % guy but am now seeking solace in these odds. not looking for responses. just needed this test to hang in for another few weeks. ann, andy, rapid and others thank you once again.

jambo · « **Reply #12 on:** June 15, 2007, 03:32:02 am »

hi all back here with a question. does anyone know the accuracy of a rapid blood-draw determine test at 4 weeks?

Matty the Damned · « **Reply #13 on:** June 15, 2007, 03:49:59 am »

Jambo,

All of your concerns are without basis. You didn't have a risk so you don't need to test.

I should also say that I know you do the rounds of the HIV/AIDS websites posting the same questions endlessly until your threads are locked and you're shown the door.

Maybe you should take the hint.

MtD

jambo · « **Reply #14 on:** June 15, 2007, 03:58:11 am »

well thanks nevertheless matty.

well i only visit 2 other sites regularly and it is due to anxiety, but i consider it rude if i am shown the door. at least here i think i have been better behaved than most other posters who have 30-40 postings of anxiety...it doesnt matter anyway. its just that i took a test and wanted some advice.

if it is seen as repeating the same story, apologies.

RapidRod · « **Reply #15 on:** June 15, 2007, 05:24:13 am »

If you have an anxiety problem see a doctor. This website nor any other will be able to help you.

Ann · « **Reply #16 on:** June 15, 2007, 06:49:12 am »

Jambo,

Where protected intercourse is concerned, luck has nothing to do with it. It has been scientifically proven that condoms prevent hiv infection.

You could NOT have become infected with hiv while wearing a condom. You did not have a risk and your four week negative result is not going to change.

You will not be allowed to use this forum as a substitute for seeing a therapist about your anxiety. Please keep that in mind.

Ann

jambo · « **Reply #17 on:** June 19, 2007, 10:01:51 pm »

obviously i am in no position to give advice or suggestions, but after having spent so many hours here i think there is a big grey area regarding the advice you guys give about oral sex. if you see a post in the IJTP forum today it is clear that a real poster acquired hiv from oral sex even though he never swallowed. this contradicts the studies of serodiscordant couples you often mention but there is no other way he could have been infected since he has had only 4 protected penetrative sex encounters.

some of you mention that there is a small risk in giving oral which appears to be the right advice. but others completely write it off and dont even mention testing. if this guy had come here as a WW many of you may have told him not to test.

i hope you do not ignore this post as another panic driven post from a ww.

Bucko · « **Reply #18 on:** June 19, 2007, 10:43:56 pm »

Jambo-

The plural of anecdote is not data.

Otherwise said, anyone can come on to a website and post whatever they like. We at AIDSmeds rely on the latest peer-reviewed and published scientific research for our information. One person's insistent claims to the contrary doesn't change science.

There are many people out there with many agendas. Right now we are suffering a hijacking of our public health policies by religious zealots and extremists who wish to criminalize any sexual act outside of procreation within marriage. These folks have many ways of twisting the dialog to suit their own goals. Frankly, I wouldn't be surprised if the posters your mentioned were just such shit-stirrers.

Fear and anxiety can cloud rational thought. The fact remains that oral sex is as safe a sexual activity as such a thing can be. If you wish to avoid ALL risk, choose celibacy. But if you are an adult who wishes to engage in sexual activity, apprise yourself of real-life (not Bigfoot and Nessie type) risks and act accordingly.

If you honestly believe that oral sex is a risky activity then chew on a rubber next time. I'd rather JO to porn.

Brent
(Who tries to remain sex-positive at all times)

xyahka · « **Reply #19 on:** June 19, 2007, 11:06:55 pm »

Just to contribute, there was a thread about the oral sex issue some weeks ago where some scientific info was exposed. I find this file posted by Ann extremely relevant to your question. Go and read it.

There is a huge difference among opinions and official/scientifical reports.

http://forums.poz.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=12630.0;attach=10457

Cheers,

Juan Carlos

jambo · « **Reply #20 on:** June 19, 2007, 11:27:20 pm »

Juan thank you for this informative piece, and thanks to Ann too for bringing this to notice. this is exactly what i was looking for. it clearly suggests the same thing, that there exists a low risk for giving oral. i would suppose that this would lead to advice here that one should test if there was such an exposure. it is a grey area and one cannot conclusively rule it out, and it is not anecdotal but there is confusion among researchers who publish scientific data too.

thank you for informing me better.

xyahka · « **Reply #21 on:** June 19, 2007, 11:46:01 pm »

Ok, i just hope you read the file completely because it clearly says the risk is almost zero. It is not stablished how low it is, but so far among all the blowjobs done around the world (that must be millions daily

) there is no case found providing evidence of infection through oral sex. People can say whatever but if in 25 years there is no such evidence, the risk is super hyper mega extremely low... or even lower. Don't let your fears make the ant look like an elephant.

And please re read what others have told you before, it is useless to keep on asking same stuff around the internet...

all the best,

Juan Carlos

Bucko · « **Reply #22 on:** June 19, 2007, 11:46:32 pm »

Jam-

I'm unclear why you are so insistent about the risks of giving fellatio, as your OP describes a straight encounter. The risks in giving head are minimal for the person with the dick in his/her mouth. But there is NO risk whatsoever in being the person being sucked.

Unless you have a taste for penis you haven't disclosed, I really don't see how this pertains to your situation.

Brent
(Who wonders what Jam's motives might be)

jambo · « **Reply #23 on:** June 19, 2007, 11:48:20 pm »

your correct it doesnt pertain to my situation but reading all the stuff here it was a confusion i was not getting any clear answers on. thats why. i think your post above sums up the risk situation nicely for oral sex.

jambo · « **Reply #24 on:** June 22, 2007, 06:00:47 am »

well this is just a thank you post. i just got a 7 week (2days shy) neg result on a rapid test. your responses had told me that it would be a neg, so it was no surprise but brings some much needed peace of mind.

now it is time to focus on some real problems for me which are more mental than physical. i greatly appreciate your efforts on running this site so well despite all the WW drama, me included. i have decided that i will give myself a time out. at least for a month, i wont be posting. if i remain anxious i will test at 3 months, but not take up any more of your time which can be spent more valuable elsewhere.

ann i really admire you, and your post yesterday to one poster (i dont only talk the talk, but walk the walk) was a great way to show me some reality though it was not meant for me. andy, you have kept it short and accurate as usual, and very effective too. rapidrod, matty, you guys are great too for helping us out. it just tells me i should do something worthwhile too.

bye to all, for this self-imposed time out

Ann · « **Reply #25 on:** June 22, 2007, 07:12:59 am »

Jambo,

You're welcome. If you need help sticking to your self-imposed time out, let me know.

There is no shame in getting yourself into counseling - it's a sign of strength, not weakness. You can get a referal from your regular doctor. Good luck, and stick with it.

Ann

jambo · « **Reply #26 on:** August 04, 2007, 07:09:58 am »

well thanks to you all i was able to stay away for a month. and then i went for a rapid test and in less than 10 mins got a neg result. as i was about to get ecstatic, i started wondering if the doc waited the required time before telling me the result. i asked him and he said the test (determine hiv 1/2 test) takes less than 5 mins. i went to the site and it says wait 15 mins before interpreting the result. can anyone tell me if i can accept this result which was given in about 10 mins or do i need to go and test again?

Ann · « **Reply #27 on:** August 04, 2007, 07:33:22 am »

Quote from: Ann on June 15, 2007, 06:49:12 am

Jambo,

Where protected intercourse is concerned, luck has nothing to do with it. It has been scientifically proven that condoms prevent hiv infection.

You could NOT have become infected with hiv while wearing a condom. You did not have a risk and your four week negative result is not going to change.

You will not be allowed to use this forum as a substitute for seeing a therapist about your anxiety. Please keep that in mind.

Ann

Your seven week negative isn't going to change either. You did NOT have a risk in the first place, remember? It doesn't really matter what the time frame was on your latest test. You ARE hiv negative.

Ann

jambo · « **Reply #28 on:** December 05, 2007, 06:26:23 pm »

well ann and others, i am back with a new situation and a new question.

i got an unprotected blowjob for about a second or two, and clearly i am freaked out. this is the only place where you clearly say no risk. everyone else seems to say low risk whatever that means. but i am afraid that i have to go through another three months of hell before testing.

do i need to be tested, assuming my partner was pos?

j

RapidRod · « **Reply #29 on:** December 05, 2007, 06:28:00 pm »

Again you didn't have a risk and no you don't have to go through testing.

jambo · « **Reply #30 on:** December 05, 2007, 06:39:17 pm »

rapid thank you for getting back so quick. yeah i should probably move on. will try, j

jambo · « **Reply #31 on:** December 10, 2007, 08:20:11 pm »

why do people say that there is a .05 in 10000 risk in getting a blowjob? i really cant understand, if there has never been a case, why is there a risk. if it is known that saliva inactivates the virus then the risk of getting a blowjob should be same as deep kissing? am i missing something here?

RapidRod · « **Reply #32 on:** December 10, 2007, 08:29:11 pm »

Yes, scientific studies.

jambo · « **Reply #33 on:** June 12, 2010, 01:37:45 am »

Reposting in my original thread.

Hello

I had protected sex yesterday, and unfortunately the woman went on to apply some massage oil on to my penis after i had put the condom on. After I had sex I checked the condom and it was visibly intact. Is this good enough or should I be worried about my exposure since oil breaks down latex?

thank you all for your guidance.
jambo
PS: when directed to the original thread i realized that something similar happened to me 3 years back. not that i had forgotten but sad to have repeated the mistake.

RapidRod · « **Reply #34 on:** June 12, 2010, 05:02:36 am »

The condom didn't fail you didn't have an exposure.

Andy Velez · « **Reply #35 on:** June 12, 2010, 08:03:23 am »

If the condom had failed you would have known it without a doubt because it isn't about some teeny little hole. The whole thinkg would have loooked like a hoop with fringe on your penis.

I'm going to warn you now that we're not going to allow another long cycle of queries from you about this non-risk situation.

You didn't have a risk this time. Get on with your life. And keep using a condom with water-based lube everytime you have vaginal or anal intercourse. Then you will be well protected against the sexual transmission of HIV.

Forums Index

Welcome

Welcome to Do I Have HIV?

Author Topic: condoms, oil and testing (Read 10345 times)