POZ Community Forums
HIV Prevention and Testing => Do I Have HIV? => Topic started by: worried24 on July 04, 2011, 11:04:14 pm
-
I was fingered last week and there was some pre-cum and his fingers. Besides I gave a blowjob (without ejaculation). I am very concerned. I was reading your forum (and others).
Although I am sure all of you are doing a great work, I must confess that I consider many of your answers very incautious. I really think it is possible that your responses regarding fingering, oral sex etc. are correct. However, you never can be so conclusive like you are.
If you go, for instance, for topic “I just tested poz” you are going to hear so many people swearing that had done only protected anal and vaginal intercourse. I know what you may be thinking: “We cannot trust in this kind of testimony”. I agree partially with this thought. Many people are completely desperate because have just tested positive. They are anonymous. Of course, some people may be lying; but others may not!!! We have to assume that it is – yes – risky to be fingered, give a blowjob (even without ejaculation) etc.
I am not saying you are not correct. I am only saying you all cannot be so sure like you are. Common expressions like “period”, “you will not make history”, “you will not be the first”, “you do not need to be tested” are not good ones. Please, do not take me badly. I really appreciate your work. I know you have a great background, but all of this is still very inconclusive.
I have also read, many times, the expression: “in the real world…”. Yes. But, in the real world people seem to get infected by oral sex etc. We really hear many irresponsible testimony, but others may be reliable testimonies.
Although I am sure you all have excellent intention. However it can lead to a bad result in some occasions.
Your opinions are based in others researchs (not yours). But if the researchs are not so conclusive why can you be?
Regards,
Worried
-
Then I suggest you take it elsewhere since you already know what we are going to say. Have a good day.
-
That is why my question is also regarding your certainty-assurance about these subjects. A minimum substantion is required for such certainty-assurance. As I said before, your statement is based on research; but if even the researchers don´t have such assurance how can you all have?
Please, my question is not a challenge, but a search for relief based in real evidences. Perhaps you all have these evidences (maybe based in factual experience, which is good!).
Andy and Ann, I would appreciate to have your point of view.
Thanks for your attention,
Worried
Andy Velez
-
Then search elsewhere.
-
Nothing you are reporting has put you at risk for HIV. HIV is a fragile virus and requires a particular kind of receptive setting in order to be transmitted sexually. The only confirmed risks for the sexual transmission of HIV are unprotected vaginal and anal intercourse. As long as condoms are used everytime for those activities you will be well protected.
Fingering is absolutely not a risk. And your saliva contains over a dozen elements and proteins which very effective prevent the transmission of viable HIV.
You are worrying needlessly and there is no need for testing.
-
Dear Andy and Ann,
Thanks for the response.
Are you so sure because of your factual experiences? How can you be so sure if the researchers (in which you all are based) are not.
For instance, I could see of you referring to one research which says: “The scientific evidence gathered in this review suggests that the risk of HIV transmission by oral–genital sexual practices is substantially lower than that carried by genital–genital or genital–anal practices.” They don´t say there is no risk. Why do you, based on that kind of research, say so?
I would only like to know from where comes such certainty/assurance. I am not saying you are not correct. I am just asking the source of such certainty/assurance. We cannot find any site with this kind of opinion. We all know you are right.
For instance, in the topic “used condom, I have all the symptoms of hiv”, you all expected it would be negative, but it came positive. I know it is "patient report". He can be forgetting information, but maybe not...You all were so sure it would came negative, but it did not.
I know rapidpod may say: “go then to other sites”. Why? If I have found a more realistic forum (like this one) why cannot I only request for substantiate?
Thanks for your patience,
Worried
-
■Anyone who continues to post excessively, questioning a conclusive negative result or no-risk situation, will be subject to a four week Time Out (a temporary ban from the Forums). If you continue to post excessively after one Time Out, you may be given a second Time Out which will last eight weeks. There is no third Time Out - it is a permanent ban. The purpose of a Time Out is to encourage you to seek the face-to-face help we cannot provide on this forum.
-
excessively?
With respect, you did not respond my questions.
Can I hear the opinion from Andy and Ann?
Thanks,
worried
-
Sure you can, they are the ones that give the timeouts.
-
Worried,
I can only speak for myself - yes, I have personal experience. I'm hiv positive and I've had several hiv negative sex partners - one was long term, over eight years. They're all still hiv negative. In the real world, all you need to do to protect your negative hiv status is to use condoms for anal or vaginal intercourse.
I've also studied the scientific hiv transmission literature extensively. What we say about hiv transmission on the cellular level has been validated by the three serodiscordant couples studies where one is positive and one is negative. In the couples who used condoms for anal or vaginal intercourse, but no barrier for oral activities, not one of the negative partners became infected with hiv. Not one. One of the studies went on for ten years and between the three studies, there were hundreds of couples, involving thousands of individuals. These were gay and straight, on treatment and treatment naive. All bases were covered.
If you cannot bring yourself to believe what we tell you, then go test and collect your negative result - which is exactly what you'll get unless you've been having unprotected anal or vaginal intercourse. If you're a sexually active adult, you should be testing at least once a year anyway.
Here's what you need to know in order to avoid hiv infection:
You need to be using condoms for anal or vaginal intercourse, every time, no exceptions until such time as you are in a securely monogamous relationship where you have both tested for ALL sexually transmitted infections together.
To agree to have unprotected intercourse is to consent to the possibility of being infected with an STI. Sex without a condom lasts only a matter of minutes, but hiv is forever.
Have a look through the condom and lube links in my signature line so you can use condoms with confidence.
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.
Use condoms for anal or vaginal intercourse, correctly and consistently, and you will avoid hiv infection. It really is that simple!
Ann
-
Dear Andy and Ann,
As I said I am sure you all have good intention. However, I believe you may be leading people to take unnecessary risks. The studies you all are reading (for years) are the same many people also are checking. And not a single doctor and/or researcher is so conclusive.
With respect,
Worried
-
Really?
Oral sex.
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.
There is no debate (among experts) about the HIV risks associated with oral sex. The risk is so low that almost nobody who cares for HIV infected patients has ever had a patient believed to have been infected that way. Among experts, it's a semantic issue about using terms like "no risk" and "very low risk". There is no difference between my or Dr. Hook's use of "low risk" and other experts' "no risk".
DR. HANSFIELD
"And oral sex is basically safe sex -- completely safe with respect to HIV and although not zero risk for other STDs, the chance of infection is far lower than for unprotected vaginal or anal sex. Please educate yourself about the real risks. If you stick with oral sex and condom-protected vaginal or anal sex, you have no HIV worries and very little worry about other STDs. " DR HANSFIELD
"I am sure you can find lots of people who believe that HIV is transmitted by oral sex, but you will not find scientific data to support this unrealistic concern..." DR HOOK
"HIV is not spread by touching, masturbation, oral sex or condom protected sex."- DR. HOOK
in the public HIV Prevention forum of MedHelp, TEAK and the other moderators maintain that oral sex in all forms is a zero risk activity. Would you agree with this assessment?
I TOTALLY AGREE / DR GARCIA
"HIV is not spread by masturbation, through oral sex, through kissing or other casual contact." Dr. Hook
"The observation on thousands and thousands of observations is that HIV is not spread by oral sex (of any sort)." DR HOOK
"I would not say your risk ,if he had HIV is "slim to none"- that's too high. I would say they are effectively zero. How much of his ejaculate or other genital secretions you may have swallowed makes no difference. EWH "
So don't go making the statement that doctors don't agree.
-
Worried,
If you are so worried about your hiv status, then go test and collect your negative result. The only real sexual risks for hiv infection are unprotected anal or vaginal intercourse. Stop wasting our time and yours by trying to prove us wrong.
Ann
-
Rapirod,
The studies you mentioned are not conclusive like your are. Besides, the first study you mentioned brings something you deny: infection by protected anal sex (according to the table).
I will not post any longer. You do not need to warn me. But I still think you may be putting lives in risk by being so conclusive.
Thanks,
worried
-
Rapirod,
The studies you mentioned are not conclusive like your are. Besides, the first study you mentioned brings something you deny: infection by protected anal sex (according to the table).
I will not post any longer. You do not need to warn me. But I still think you may be putting lives in risk by being so conclusive.
Thanks,
worried
These studies are the latest and most conclusive of all human-tracking studies. To date and despite strenuous investigation by the scientific community, they have yet to be refuted.
According to the table? So you believe that HIV can be transmitted through a condom? Please explain this.
In addition, we are not putting lives at risk. No one who has posted here without a clearly documented case of actual exposure has ever tested positive. This iin over fifteen years of our "putting lives at risk."
I recommend TheBody.com if you wish to find speculative fiction with which to justiofy your fear and phobia - and if you desire to continue this thinly veiled perpetuation of HIV stigma.
At this site, we use first tiered peer-reviewed science. Which you are clearly not capable of understanding, thanks (I sincerely hope) to your agitated and irrational emotional state.
-
Then, why do you all think there are so many (lots of them) people in "I just teste poz" topic that are sure they get the virus from oral sex? Of course, some man be lying or only wrong (forget etc), but there are many...
-
■Anyone who continues to post excessively, questioning a conclusive negative result or no-risk situation, will be subject to a four week Time Out (a temporary ban from the Forums). If you continue to post excessively after one Time Out, you may be given a second Time Out which will last eight weeks. There is no third Time Out - it is a permanent ban. The purpose of a Time Out is to encourage you to seek the face-to-face help we cannot provide on this forum.
-
Please, just answer my last question.
-
It's not our job to convince you of anything. We put out what we know from science-based results and decades of experience in the epidemic.
If you are fearful about some sexual act, then don't do it.
I am going to warn you that you cannot continue to come back repeatedly about a non-risk incident. You are going to find yourself getting a Time Out from the site. You may not mind that since you don't seem to put much stock in what we say to you.
As Ann said, if you have doubts, get tested and collect the inevitable negative result. You were not at risk for HIV. End of story.
-
Sorry to have insisted. Thanks for your information, Ann, Andy and Rapirod.
-
I do not know if I can contribute or not. But I found a very good discussion (it is a medical panel in San Francisco) about this subject. Please, disregard it if you all find it is not interesting (or if you already have seen it).
http://hivinsite.ucsf.edu/InSite?page=pr-rr-05
-
Old news that is outdated. MOVE ON.
-
Worried,
I gave you that Time Out Rodney warned you about. The Time Out began on July 10th and has 21 more days to run.
However, we were having problems with our server that day and I could not get back in to let you know you'd been Timed Out and by the time the server was back up, I'd forgotten.
What reminded me to let you know is that you tried for a new account today. If you try for a new account again to get around your time out, you will be permanently banned. You get a pass this time only because I forgot to let you know about your TO and warn you about creating a new account.
Ann
-
Worried,
As you have tried for yet another account, you are now permanently banned. Don't bother complaining about this ban - you agreed to having one and only one account each and every time you applied for an account.
If you were unsure of why you could not log in, you should have emailed us. Our contact details (editors@aidsmeds.com or forums@aidsmeds.com) freely available on this website.
Ann