Semen-to-cut infection risk...?

[johnton807]

Hello,
Ann made me type this whole thing over (sorry for the original misplacement, Ann).

This is a compelling site; the level of knowledge and insight is impressive.

I read Ann's forceful comment that there is zero HIV risk associated with exposing a cut finger to vaginal fluids through digital penetration of the vagina (I've read that same level of emphasis on other reputable sites and believe it to be true).  My question is, would the experts at POZ feel that the same negligible risk applies to situations in which a cut finger were exposed to SEMEN, as opposed to vaginal fluids?

I'm hopeful that the answer is "yes" and that the cut I had, which came into contact with ejaculated semen, is no more a concern than would be the case HAD the fluid been vaginal vs seminal.

Finally (I'm in an isolated geographical area with little access to informed opinion, so I hope you'll indulge me here), is there any risk in this situation: I wore a condom while receiving fellatio; at some point I removed the condom and, with the same hand, masturbated myself to ejaculation.  It was dark and I thus have no knowledge of whether any blood (from the other person's mouth) was present on the condom.  Had there been blood, was an HIV risk present as the result of my hand touching the condom during its removal and then using the same hand to vigorously rub my penis during self-masturbation...i.e., could blood transfer have occurred from the person's mouth, to the condom, to my hand, to my penis...Sounds remote even to someone as out of it as me...but I can't tell you how much I'd appreciate an answer.

Thank you!

[Ann]

John,

Nothing you discuss here is a risk for hiv infection. Hiv is primarily transmitted INSIDE the human body, as in unprotected anal or vaginal intercourse. Once hiv finds itself outside the body, it quickly becomes damaged and unable to infect.

You don't need to wear a condom for getting a blowjob. Not one person has ever become infected through getting a blowjob and you will not be the first. You only need to wear one if the person blowing you feels more comfortable that way.

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 STIs together. To agree to have unprotected intercourse is to consent to the possibility of being infected with a sexually transmitted infection. Sex with 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.

While you do NOT need to test 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.

Use condoms correctly and consistently for anal or vaginal intercourse and you will avoid hiv infection. It really is that simple.

Ann

[Andy Velez]

You're hanging out needlessly in the land of what ifs and maybes, all to no good purpose.

HIV is a fragile virus and not easily transmitted. Take a breath and look at the ifs in the situation starting with IF the person who gave you oral was HIV+. And that's a big if. (Incidentally it's not necessary to wear a condom when getting a blowjob. There's never been a case confirmed of transmission in that manner in the entire history of the epidemic).

So then you're worrying IF the giver had blow in their mouth and if it was on the condom and if you got it on your hand when you masturbated yourself and if that blood got into a cut and if if if.

To me this whole concern suggests some feelings about the whole experience rather than any risk for transmission. I don't see any risk beyond theoretical here in the sense that anytime you have sex with other than your own hand there is theoretically some risk. But in the real world of HIV science transmission doesn't happen in this manner and you aren't going to make history by becoming the first to do so.

No need for testing nor for further concern is what I say.

Cheers,

[johnton807]

Thank you, Ann and Andy.

I realize that the latter scenario I mentioned is almost too remote to even warrant an answer (but thanks).  Ann referred generally to my cut-finger/semen-exposure concern as it relates/compares to your site's previous assessment of a cut finger's exposure to vaginal secretions (non-risk); however, Andy, could I ask you to specifically address that aspect: that is, do you consider the (negligible) risk of a cut finger's contacting infected vaginal secretions to be the same as if the cut finger were to instead contact SEMEN?

Thanks for taking the time.  I know I'll feel better when that particular matter is directly addressed.

 

[Ann]

John,

Semen, vaginal fluids, it doesn't matter. For a start, there aren't enough of the correct type of cells present that hiv needs to infect in a small cut . Secondly, hiv is fragile and semen or vaginal fluid getting into a cut just doesn't cut it, if you'll pardon the expression. Not one person has ever become infected from semen or vaginal fluids getting into a cut and you won't be the first.

Just make sure you're using condoms for anal or vaginal intercourse and you'll be fine.

Ann

[johnton807]

Hi Ann,

Ah...just when I think I've got the definitive, crystal-clear reply I'm after...I read on and see that you now qualify the emphatic, forceful tone of your previous responses to other questioners regarding vaginal secretion/cut issues by invoking the somewhat-disconcerting phrase, "...fluid getting into a SMALL cut just doesn't cut it..."

The previous, unequivocal replies you've given others disregarded potential cut size and made no mention of that specific factor; do you still stand by those former replies or do you now feel that anything larger than the "small" size you had in mind is a different matter altogether?  If you feel that, in the case of semen exposure to a cut, size does matter (let's just pardon each other), could you elaborate?

Thanks!

[Ann]

John,

I guess I said small cut because cuts on fingers generally ARE small - because in the greater scheme of the body, fingers themselves are small. Let's not start splitting hair here, ok? 

You didn't have a risk. Period.

Ann

[johnton807]

Hi Ann,

Ok!  Thanks for the clarification and for hangin' in there during the hyper-analytical semantic forensics.

Really appreciate the service.

[johnton807]

Quick followup to Moderator Andy,

I shared the information given to me yesterday by Ann with my friend, who was equally pleased with the site's forthright, issue-specific dialogue. As I related the conversation, my friend pointed out that Andy never did directly address my question to him requesting clarification of his position regarding the comparative HIV risks for a cut finger coming into contact with a) vaginal fluids; b) semen...and he suggested I ask Andy directly if this is because his position is different than Ann's...or, Andy, do you fully agree with Ann that the risk of exposing a cut finger to semen is no greather than is the risk for exposing that same cut finger to vaginal fluids?

If you have a different opinion, would you elaborate on it, please?

Again, great site, great feedback and a refreshing breath of straight-talk and real-world information.

[Andy Velez]

Yes, I do agree with Ann.

When a subject is already "covered" I don't necessarily see a need for simply re-stating the same information except when either clarifying a particular point or reinforcing the information for someone who's particularly worried.

[johnton807]

Hi Andy,

Got it!  I'll remember that in the event of future posts.

Thanks again (your day starts early: great for the posters!)

[johnton807]

Liz,

You touched on an approach that may help allay your fears prior to the end of the full waiting period.  If you can appeal to whatever aspect of your partner's emotions or sense of practicality may work--beg him, play him, pay him--in order to have him get tested, you'd likely be able to put to rest the inevitable catastrophizing, guilt and interminable anaylsis of every possible sexually-related scenario you were ever in...until your mind becomes numb, over and over.  This certainly isn't peculiar to you; it's the way all responsible, proud and intelligent people react to self-imposed risk and, without following the relaxation/mind-related responses the moderators have given you, you'll drive yourself crazy...and all, most very likely, for naught, since the odds are very much on your side. 

When the test day comes, you can either walk in there a nervous, burned-out wreck or, by really and truly dismissing it from your mind, use this traumatic circumstance as the begiinning point of living in the moment, cherishing everything about life and not dwelling on things you can't change...so that, come test day, you walk in there healthy, stronger than ever, way smarter than ever...and when the probably-positive result comes back, your rush of euphoria and relief you experience willl, combined with the new, stronger, better person you've become, make it one of the most important days of your life.

[johnton807]

Some Canadian provinces use 14 weeks.  Hard to imagine, after all this time, the lack of global (or even intra-national) standardization.

[Ann]

John,

I removed the post (above) you made in another person's thread. You are in no position to give advice to others here. Please keep all your additional thoughts or comments here, in your OWN thread.

I removed you post because we do NOT advise people to "beg" or "play" their sexual partners to get a test to allay their own fears. A person's sexual health is their OWN responsibility and if they have had a risk, they need to test themselves.

If I find you in another thread, other than you own, again, you will quite possibly be given a time out. Please consider yourself warned.

Thank you for your cooperation.

Ann

PS - I also removed the post you made in o_g's thread. Stop posting advice NOW please!

[johnton807]

Okay, okay--I didn't realize the rules and will not transgress again. 

I haven't been threatened with a "time-out" for a very long time; reminds me of when I used to whack my brother with a Nerf bat.

[Ann]

John,

If I hear of you whacking your brother with a nerf bat, a time out could be arranged.

Thanks for cooperating.

Ann

[johnton807]

That was a very good chastising, by the way; I'm still twitching.  Now I've got to find a site/forum with moderators for self-esteem/rejection. 

I'm scared to deviate much, but...had you been aware that at least one Canadian province uses 14 weeks as the waiting period?  Quite a spread over Massachussetts' six.  If this is in the wrong place, don't do another number on me...you can just delete it and I'll get it.  I suppose one of these days I should read the posting rules...

[Ann]

John,

You can post comments or questions - as long as you're posting in this thread.

The window in Europe is twelve weeks. Twelve, thirteen, fourteen, it doesn't make a difference as long as it's pretty much three months. In Massachusetts, the window is only six weeks at state (commonwealth, to be precise) run testing centers where they can be sure the most up-to-date testing kits are being used - the ones with the p24 antigen test bundled into the kit. (for more info on p24, see the Testing Lesson) I'm fully expecting the window period to be six weeks everywhere in the next few years as the newer test come into wide-spread use. For now, the window period will remain at three months.

But why are you worrying about this? I hope it is for future reference only, because you didn't have a risk you need to calculate a window period for. If you always use condoms correctly and consistently when you have anal or vaginal intercourse, you will NEVER have to worry about the window period. Just make sure you get your annual or semi-annual sexual health care check up and you'll be fine.

Ann

[johnton807]

Hi Ann,

Yes, indeed, my 14-week Canadian-testing observation was for interest's sake only.  I'm now fully convinced of the limited--but critical--means of HIV transmission.

[johnton807]

Hi Andy,

Your reply to a gentleman regarding his Tijuana lapdance/vaginal-fluid concerns has prompted this additional question from me.

You and Ann recently informed me quite clearly that the risk of a finger or hand cut's coming into contact with vaginal fluids was the same as if that cut came into contact with semen (basically, zero risk, and that "...vaginal fluids, semen, it doesn't matter...").  Your lapdance-related reply indicated that one main reason that vaginal fluids aren't of concern following, for example ,digital penetration by a cut finger, is because the infectious cells are farther up the female genitalia.

My question refers again to the comparative vaginal-fluid/semen exposure to a cut:  if one main reason, as you stated, that vaginal fluids aren't a risk during masturbation, etc., is that the infectious cells are higher up the female's anatomy, wouldn't that suggest that SEMEN would pose a greater risk to a cut than would vaginal fluids, since the infectious content of semen isn't dependent on internal distance from the reach of the potential cut?

Thank you; I'd appreciate your clarification of this (not questioning your previous answer to me; just curious about the distinctions that now seem to exist between vaginal fluids' and semen's infectiousness).

[Andy Velez]

John, #1, please don't start a new thread everytime you have another question. I've merged your latest thread into the previous one so readers can follow the conversation. Thanks for your cooperation.

HIV is a fragile virus. It is not transmitted through fingering or mutual masturbation. It requires a very friendly setting to remain viable and with access to receptive body parts, such as in vaginal or anal intercourse.

 

[johnton807]

OK.  (Does my inquiry thus have nothing to do with the process of transmission?)

[Andy Velez]

I don't understand your question.

[ACinKC]

John the plain and simple fact is that it doesnt happen that way in the real world.  You didnt have a fresh cut on your hand or semen that was on it so lets just stick to your situation.

The facts are that HIV is transmitted INSIDE the body.  Not through mythical cuts.  Or stealth semen.

[johnton807]

To ACinKc,

You seem to have a problem with reading comprehension; if you'd bothered to read more than the last couple of entries of the thread you'd have quickly realized that my inquiries have all been based on exactly the personal semen-to-cut scenario which you somehow feel qualified to state didn't happen.  So please save your "mythical cut" and "stealth semen" cracks for occasions where there isn't a sincere and legitimate inquiry based on thread continuity...or you're going to give this site's reputation for intelligent processing and accurate insight a bad name.

[Andy Velez]

OK, John. Chill.

Now please clarify your question because I still don't get it.

[ACinKC]

Quick followup to Moderator Andy,

I shared the information given to me yesterday by Ann with my friend, who was equally pleased with the site's forthright, issue-specific dialogue. As I related the conversation, my friend pointed out that Andy never did directly address my question to him requesting clarification of his position regarding the comparative HIV risks for a cut finger coming into contact with a) vaginal fluids; b) semen...and he suggested I ask Andy directly if this is because his position is different than Ann's...or, Andy, do you fully agree with Ann that the risk of exposing a cut finger to semen is no greather than is the risk for exposing that same cut finger to vaginal fluids?

If you have a different opinion, would you elaborate on it, please?

Again, great site, great feedback and a refreshing breath of straight-talk and real-world information.

Well I apologize.  I was basing my answer off of this post, where you appeared to me to be asking on behalf of a friend.  So i apparently DO have an issue with reading comprehension because  I re-read it and it clearly states that *you* asked the original question.

So, now that THAT is out of the way.

The answers you have received will not change.

And I quote in regards to your ORIGINAL situation:

From Ann: Nothing you discuss here is a risk for hiv infection. Hiv is primarily transmitted INSIDE the human body, as in unprotected anal or vaginal intercourse. Once hiv finds itself outside the body, it quickly becomes damaged and unable to infect.

From Andy:  You're hanging out needlessly in the land of what ifs and maybes, all to no good purpose.

HIV is a fragile virus and not easily transmitted. Take a breath and look at the ifs in the situation starting with IF the person who gave you oral was HIV+. And that's a big if. (Incidentally it's not necessary to wear a condom when getting a blowjob. There's never been a case confirmed of transmission in that manner in the entire history of the epidemic).

So then you're worrying IF the giver had blow in their mouth and if it was on the condom and if you got it on your hand when you masturbated yourself and if that blood got into a cut and if if if.

From Ann:  Semen, vaginal fluids, it doesn't matter. For a start, there aren't enough of the correct type of cells present that hiv needs to infect in a small cut . Secondly, hiv is fragile and semen or vaginal fluid getting into a cut just doesn't cut it, if you'll pardon the expression. Not one person has ever become infected from semen or vaginal fluids getting into a cut and you won't be the first.

So you see my friend maybe the reading comprehension bug has bitten you as well.  

[johnton807]

Hi AC/Andy,

The question I was hoping to get an answer to was laid out in my Reply #19...and it was prompted singularly and specificaly and ONLY by Andy's reply to someone who had a lapdance in Tijuana, which reply of Andy's referred to the positioning of certain infected cervical cells and their distance within the cervix.  That comment from Andy simply piqued my curiosity and prompted me to ask my question in #19...in which I hoped to gain additional insight, from your perspectives, about why semen on my cut hand was considered to be just as safe as vaginal fluids would have been on my cut hand...if cell distance from the cut was any kind of factor.

I know it's a technical area (and maybe you don't want to get into it, which is fine and I'd expect you to simply say so, no problem at all), buit the fact is, that information was entered by Andy and I simpmly wanted the elaboration I requested in Reply #19. 

And, AC, as I clearly state in that 319 reply, while it was very nice of you to cut and paste their previous responses for me, I am NOT IN ANY WAY challenging Andy's or Ann's previous answers, I'm not seeking reinforcement of information already given, I'm not failing to process a single thing I've been told--I'm just asking for Andy's elaboratioin on the point he made about vaginal fluids' infectiousness based on their distance inside the cervix. 

Perhaps if you read all those entries just one more time, AC...

[johnton807]

Guys,

It really isn't necessary to reply.  My inquiry is purely technical, has no practical implications and simply fell under the heading of intellectual curiosity. 

Let's call it a day.

[ACinKC]

OK.  Obviously infected cells on the cervix are less of a risk than semen directly onto an infectable surface of the body.  Key words there are infectable surface of the body.  That isnt a cut on your hand.  That being said, HIV transmission from semen on a cut on the hand has not happened.  

[johnton807]

Thanks for the reply; have a good one.

[johnton807]

Hello Folks,

Two quick questions:

1) Can you think of any scenario in which mutual (male-to-male) masturbation/ejaculation would pose any risk whatsoever for HIV transmission?
2) I know that different testing standards exist in different areas.  I'm told that where I live, the MEIA form of the Elisa test is used.  Would a 12-week waiting period be sufficient, should a person decide to go that route?

Thank you.

[ACinKC]

1) If you shared a needle to inject drugs before you masturbated you could have a risk.  Other than that NO.

2) 13 week test is conclusive, just wait the extra week and you wont have any what if's.  (Hopefully)

[johnton807]

Thanks, AC.

I've seen some postings by Ann in which she recommends a three-month period.  Is there a particular reason for that slight discrepancy or is it just personal preference and considered conclusive in either case? 

Finally, if you knew of someone who had the test at 12 1/3 weeks, would you suggest they bother to return for a retest to be sure the 13 weeks had passed?

Thanks again!

[ACinKC]

3 months IS 13 weeks.  Same thing.

Just wait the extra few days.  You clearly have a hieghtened anxiety level over this, so you would probably come back questioning the validity if you dont wait.  That said if you go through with testing a few days early it's not going to matter.  They wont POOF appear out of nowhere in the span of a couple of days. 

[johnton807]

That clarifies things.  I suppose that, since the specific period in question included the shorter month of February, 3 months in this case is a bit shy of thirteen weeks.  I'm glad to understand the theory of it, though...in that a couple of days premature at that stage aren't going to change the result.

[johnton807]

Hope it's okay to ask a related question on this individual's thread (if not, I'm sure I'll be promptly collared!).

Because of my travel schedule, remote locations and sparse testing facilities, should I find that the only practical time to have an MEIA Elisa test is after 12 1/2 weeks, would you agree that the 3-4 day shortfall (compared to the 13-week recommendation) is insignificant...or would you recommend further another future test when my schedule permits?

Thank you!

[RapidRod]

johnton807, please don't post any questions in other people's threads. Keep all your questions and concerns in your own thread. 

[Ann]

johnton,

I removed the question you posted in another person's thread and placed it here, in your own thread, which is the ONLY place you should be posting additional thoughts or questions. Please read the Welcome Thread and abide by our forum posting guidelines in future.

Twelve or thirteen weeks, it doesn't matter. Either is conclusive.

Ann

[johnton807]

Understood.  And thanks.

[johnton807]

I know that this site/forum are HIV-specific; however, given the forthright and real-world answers, I'm wondering if it's okay to ask a related STD questsion:

If the only activity I'm planning on is mutual masturbation (heterosexual and homosexual) and I'd rather err on the side of across-the-board safety, are there times where you'd recommend that a condom be used by me to fully minimize the range of prospective risks  (however remote) associated with specific STD transmission possibilities?

(Please suppress all urges to recommend that I just walk around all day wearing a condom...I've found that the inside of my fly tears the rubber.)

Thanks!

[ACinKC]

If you want NO WORRIES about anything then I'd wear a condom. 

[johnton807]

Thanks, AC.  Would there be any reason for my male partner to also wear one--i.e., can I incur any sort of infection by his semen's contacting any of my bare skin that's not condom-protected? 

If the answer is yes, would my mutual masturbation with a female expose me to any STD risks if her fluids contacted any of my unprotected skin?

[ACinKC]

Let me tell you personally I would not wear a condom for mutual masturbation.  I am telling you that it is a good idea for you PERSONALLY if you dont want to ever worry about anything.

There are inherent risks in anything other than self masturbation.  You have to come to terms with what those risks are.  I suggest you do some research on STD's and how they are transmitted.  Good news is most of them are curable, so even if you do get one of the little nasties you generally can get rid of it.  Providing you are testing at least once a year and are made aware of it.

[johnton807]

Hello,

Sorry for initially placing this inquiry in the wrong thread.  It's been a while since I've been here.

I'm in a small, remote area and will be flying to an even more remote place for a couple of months on work.  I'll worry like crazy if I don't sort some of this out, so please let me know if you feel the following activity could result in any form of STD infection.

A month ago I engaged in mutual masturbation with another male (I wore a condom; my partner did not).  Some of his semen contracted my hand, and a few minutes later that hand was used to remove the condom.  If semen from that hand, during condom removal, came in contact with my penis, could it result in an STD with the symptom of a firm pimple occurring about an inch down from the tip of the penis, and with some sore abrasion beneath the pimple?

Thanks so much.

John
 

[Matty the Damned]

John,

We've been through this with you endlessly. Mutual masturbation is not a risk for HIV infection. If you have lesions on your penis, you should show them to a doctor. We cannot diagnose such things over the internet.

MtD

[johnton807]

Aren't you pleasant.  If you'd read my question more carefully, you'd realize I'm asking about other STD's; I fully realize, thanks to you "endless" insights, that mutual masturbation is not a factor in HIV transmission.  Are you willing to address my specific inquiry regarding herpes, syphilis, etc., or are you going to distribute attitude toward my since question?

If it were possible to see a doctor in this location, I'd do it.  Ever think of that?  Maybe you shouldn't be doing this type of volunteering.

[Matty the Damned]

Aren't you pleasant.  If you'd read my question more carefully, you'd realize I'm asking about other STD's; I fully realize, thanks to you "endless" insights, that mutual masturbation is not a factor in HIV transmission.  Are you willing to address my specific inquiry regarding herpes, syphilis, etc., or are you going to distribute attitude toward my since question?


Yes, I'm charm personified. I style myself as "Matty the Damned" and you were expecting what, a foot rub?

And if you had paid closer attention you'd note that we are an HIV/AIDS specific website. Does the sign at the top say Syphilismeds?

No I don't believe it does.

From our Welcome Thread, which after 20+ posts should have made an attempt to read:

Here in the Am I Infected? Forum, you will be able to ask questions relating to HIV risk assessment and HIV testing.

Now you may live in a remote area. You may live on the dark side of the moon. That makes not a whit of difference here. Commonsense (you've heard of that I take it?) would suggest that if you have sores and lesions on your cock, you show them to a doctor.

How you get there is your problem.

MtD

[Andy Velez]

We can't diagnose anything here. We can only tell you with certainty that based on what you have described you were not at any risk for HIV transmission via the incident you most recently reported.

Whatever is happening on your penis skin-wise has nothing to do with HIV. You need to be in contact with a doctor to have it diagnosed and treated. We can't do that for you here and as Matty has reminded you this is an HIV-specific site.

I've deleted your other most recently begun thread. Please keep all entries in this same thread.

Good luck with getting your problem properly diagnosed and treated.

[johnton807]

Thanks; I'll likely have a chance to access a clinic in a few weeks after I'm back in civilization.

With this sudden symptom's erupting on the eve of my prolonged departure, I suppose I reflexively reached out (inappropriately, I do realize) to the one place I knew about that may have an encouraging insight or opinion.  As we all know, when strange physiological things develop--particularly during physical isolation and in an already sensitized state--improper and irrational decisions sometimes follow.

We should definitely all take Matty very seriously...he certainly does.

Thanks again, Andy.

--John