A good amount of FRESH hiv infected blood is required for transmission of hiv from infected to non infected person AND EVEN IN THAT CONDITION IT SHOULD GO INSTANTLY AND IMMEDIATELY.......small little nicks and cuts wont give you hiv..
Stabbing and cuts are two different things you need to be specific with your question a surface cut will not give hiv but stabbing would do only if it meets above criteria...
IF THE KNIFE HAS ADEQUATE FRESH HIV BLOOD AND IF IT IS ALMOST STABBED INSTANTLY AND IMMEDIATELY IT POSES A WAY TO REACH BLOODSTREAM LEADING TO TRANSMISSION OF HIV
Sorry I'm confused. Do you mean no, it is not a risk? Or no it is not no risk, meaning there is a risk?
Please say it like "no risk"
And touching hiv+ blood without any cuts or wounds is also no risk right? Last question I promise.
You worry about 1 man from 2010 as it says 1st reported case ever. Which means very very rare. But with a knife it is shoved deep into the body...blood stream and organs and tissue. Deep inside the body.
And as you see from the first article it is no risk for little things like a cut on a hand.
http://helpline.aidsvancouver.org/question/high-risk-kinfe-cut-pep
And
http://www.poz.com/articles/Knife_Fight_Transmission_1_19283.shtml
Both these are links to what I read. They are from websites that deal with hiv. If what the articles say is true then how was this possible? Wouldn't the knife have been exposed to oxygen at some point so how did infection still occur?
We can't speculate on something you say you read. You have no risk.