Questions

[alexandrur]

Hello; the story; I was at Cupidy for the soapy massage in Bangkok. After the massage, I laid down on the bed and she starts blowjob with condom. after this, we did sex with a condom but  I didn’t finish. so pulled out and she removed the condom but don’t know if she cleaned her hands after removing; she did me a hand job and I was fingering her while doing this so she might have some vaginal liquid on her hands while doing the hand job. This is I’m a bit worried as don’t know if can get any STD like this. I’ve told mamasan about this but she guaranteed there is no risk for STD as the girls are regularly checked and they have records for this but don't know how trustable she is. Any risks to be infected with HIV? thanks

[Jim Allen]

Nothing you mentioned was a risk for HIV transmission.

Here's what you need to know in order to avoid hiv infection:
Use condoms for anal or vaginal intercourse, correctly and consistently, every time, no exceptions.

Keep in mind that some sexual practices which may be described as ‘safe’ in terms of HIV transmission might still pose a risk for transmission of other STI's, so please do get fully tested regularly and at least yearly for all STI's including but not limited to HIV and test more frequently if unprotected intercourse occurs

Also note that it is possible to have an STI and show no signs or symptoms and the only way of knowing is by testing.

More information on HIV Basics, PEP, TaSP and Transmission can be found through the links in my signature to our POZ pages, this includes information on HIV Testing

Kind regards

Jim

Please Note.
As a member of the AM I Infected Forum you are required to only post in this one thread no matter how long between visits or the subject matter. You can find this thread by going to your profile and selecting show own post and it will take you here . It helps us to help you when you keep all your thoughts or questions in one thread and it helps other readers to follow the discussion. Any additional threads will be deleted.

[alexandrur]

Thanks Jim,

If I understand correctly HIV it will transmit only inside the human body; once the seminal fluid, vaginal fluids are are out the human body there is no risk of infection with HIV even this will be in contact with your sexual organs. (Pretty much what I said in my comment - vaginal liquid on the penis).

Is this correct?

[Jim Allen]

Yes, the outer receptors needed to infect damage leaving any HIV unable to infect human cells in the conditions you mentioned, also vaginal fluid is a very wide description in short most do not contain HIV at levels to infect to start with, not that it matters as said once outside the body its not a risk no matter if it did or did not contain HIV. 

Jim

[alexandrur]

Thanks Jim!

Good info for me and a big relief! I will go thru the forum and posts here as can find some interesting information.

Alexandru

[Jim Allen]

You're welcome

[alexandrur]

Hello again;
I have few questions for you ( it might sound silly but there are no silly questions).
If someone cut his finger while making a sandwitch ( so there might be blood on the knife) and use the same knife to cut meat and bread, while are eating the sandwich afterwards ( it might some blood on it from the knife) there is any risk to get infected?
After the story I mentioned in the first post, for my peace of mind after 6 months past incident, I did a 4gen combo test and comeback negative as you mentioned will be. The rules here in Romania says you should test at 6 months ( on this forum is mentioned 3). I believe a negative result at 6 months will rule out the HIV infection. they are saying that using the 6 months rule because the people might not remember the date of exposure.
thanks

regards,

Dragos

[Jim Allen]

Asked and answered already.

You can't get hiv from food. Food is exposed outside the human body to air, saliva and a couple of more barriers. You're stressing over myths that belong to the 1980's . Stop it !

Yes, the outer receptors needed to infect damage leaving any HIV unable to infect human cells in the conditions you mentioned, also vaginal fluid is a very wide description in short most do not contain HIV at levels to infect to start with, not that it matters as said once outside the body its not a risk no matter if it did or did not contain HIV. 

Jim

3 months testing window has been conclusive for the past 20 years amd you had no risk or exposure to test for.

If you continue to post nonsense it will lead to a ban.

Jim

[alexandrur]

Thanks for reply Jim!
After posting first time on this site I wanted to do some research about my country in terms of HIV testing and preventing programs.
Thing is here everybody is suggesting testing as 6 months ( you will find clinics telling you to do tests at 1 year after possible infection.
This info you can find even on ARAS - Asociatia Romana Anti-SIDA ( Romanian Association Anti-AIDS  http://www.arasnet.ro/informeaza-te/hivsida/testare-hiv/) - ( Este foarte importantă de înțeles perioada serologică, de 3-6 luni, perioadă în care nu are loc seroconversie, deci organismul nu formează anticorpi specifici anti HIV, dar persoana este infectată, motiv pentru care un test ELISA negativ îți oferă certitudinea că infectarea nu s-a produs în urmă cu 6 luni.  - translaton in English - It is very important to understand the serologic period of 3-6 months, during which time there is no seroconversion, so the body does not form anti-HIV-specific antibodies, but the person is infected, which is why a negative ELISA gives you the certainty that the infection does not produced 6 months ago.)

I don't want to make any debate out of this but probably here they don't follow the WHO recommendations in terms of HIV testing.

Thanks again,

[Jim Allen]

Lets put it into some real world context for you...

You had no risk! There is something deeply wrong with your thinking. You had no exposure and no risk to test for in the first place, so no need to read documents from someone who is 20 years out of date with the rest of the scientific community to begin with.

Let it go and move on!

There is allot of misinformation including the ARAS - Asociatia Romana Anti-SIDA link you gave us and plenty of stories on the internet and lots of opinions or outdated data that get passed around as facts, We however rely on the latest scientific peer reviewed science for our assessments. This also gets fed back into the poz pages on transmission risks if needed and great effort is put into ensuring the message is clear.

The initial tests looks for an antibodies response and an explain an HIV antibody response can be detected as early as two weeks even in some people, however 99% of people will test positive by 3 months except for those with underling medical conditions such as cancer and chemo or long term  IV drug users.
In other-words false negatives have been linked/tracked back to either testing too soon, or people with serious underling medical conditions even taking all of this into account its still a freakishly rare

If you ever do have an exposure, well most people will produce antibodies at levels detectable by any blood drawn test within 22 - 28 days, so tests that are more sensitive and may pick up sooner, however outliers do take longer and  conclusive remains 3 months no matter what generation of test, hence when people do have a viable exposure we recommend testing at 6 weeks and than at 3 months to simply confirm the result.

Some people and sites do not even recommend the 3 months anymore with blood draw tests however as outliers between 6 weeks & 3 months do actually happen and so we still recommend repeat testing to exclude HIV infection following a real world risk.

6 months is 20 years out of date and rubbish, again you had no reason to test.
Move on with your life!

Stop reading stuff online out context or real world context and remember to use condoms going forward, and as all sexual active and responsible adults should, do test as a normal routine for HIV & STI's and test at the very least yearly.

Kind regards

Jim

BTW:
References: Small sample of real studies, and medical experts into this and not some charities outdated and irrelevant opinion like you are reading.

Even on older rapid tests the first- through third-generation test all scored perfectly at correctly identifying HIV-negative cases, except for the OraQuick Advance rapid saliva test, which was 99.9 percent accurate in one study.

So as long as you have no underling medical reason for a severally suppressed immune system like the chemo or test before the window period of 3 months the results are conclusive and you need to move on with your life.


(Generation 1/2/3)

Pilcher CD et al. Performance of Rapid Point-of-Care and Laboratory Tests for Acute and Established HIV Infection in San Francisco. PLOS ONE, 2013.

Branson BM State of the art for diagnosis of HIV infection. Clin Infect Dis 45:S221-225, 2007

Coombs RW Clinical laboratory diagnosis of HIV-1 and use of viral RNA to monitor infection. In Holmes KK (editor), Sexually Transmitted Diseases. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2008

Maldarelli F Diagnosis of Human Immunodeficiency Virus infection. In Mandell, Douglas and Bennett’s Principles and Practice of Infectious Diseases (sixth edition). Philadelphia: Elsevier Churchill Livingstone, 2004

Parry JV et al. Towards error-free HIV diagnosis: guidelines on laboratory practice. Comm Dis Pub Health 6:334-350, 2003

Jim comment- This is on 3rd gen testing accuracy Perry KR et al. Improvement in the performance of HIV screening kits. Transfus Med 18:228-240, 2008

(Gen 4)
Bentsen C Performance evaluation of the Bio-Rad Laboratories GS HIV Combo Ag/Ab EIA, a 4th generation HIV assay for the simultaneous detection of HIV p24 antigen and antibodies to HIV-1 (groups M and O) and HIV-2 in human serum or plasma. Journal of Clinical Virology, S57-S61, 2011

Nick S Sensitivities of CE-Marked HIV, HCV, and HBsAg Assays. Journal of Medical Virology, S59-S64, 2007

Eshelman S Detection of Individuals With Acute HIV-1 Infection Using the ARCHITECT HIV Ag/Ab Combo Assay. Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndromes, 121-4, 2009

Speers D et al. Combination assay detecting both Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) p24 antigen and anti-HIV antibodies opens a second diagnostic window. J Clin Microbiol 43:5397-5399, 2005

Ly TD et al. Evaluation of the sensitivity and specificity of six HIV combined p24 antigen and antibody assays. J Virol Methods 122:185-94, 2004

http://www.bhiva.org/
Testing guidelines bhiva "British HIV association" : Although fourth generation tests shorten the time from exposure to seroconversion a repeat test at three months is still recommended to definitively exclude HIV infection.
https://www.cdc.gov/hiv/testing/clinical/index.html

2018
CDC recently published research findings that estimate the window period for 20 U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved HIV tests. The study showed that laboratory testing using antigen/antibody tests detects HIV infection sooner than other available tests that detect only antibodies. If a person gets a laboratory-based antigen/antibody test on blood plasma less than 45 days after a possible HIV exposure and the result is negative, follow-up testing can begin 45 days after the possible HIV exposure. For all other tests, CDC recommends testing again at least 90 days after exposure to be sure that a negative test result is accurate.

2015 WHO http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/179870/9789241508926_eng.pdf;jsessionid=1F192FECF734A0DE7E2520864984AE63?sequence=1
In many settings post-test counselling messages recommend that all people who have a
non-reactive (HIV-negative) test result should return for retesting to rule out acute
infection that is too early for the test to detect – in other words, in the window period.
- (3 months)

However, retesting is needed only for HIV-negative individuals who report recent
or ongoing risk of exposure. For most people who test HIV-negative, additional
retesting to rule out being in the window period is not necessary and may waste
resources.