Aa
What's the Risk
Hi Dr.
10 days ago, i had unprotected oral sex and protected vaginal sex with a CSW in Cameroon. Given the high HIV and STD's prevalence rates in Africa im pretty worried that i may have contracted HIV or some other form of STD.
2days after the encounter i noticed a itchy, kind of tingling sensation in my genitals.I didnt think much of it till i came down with a fever 3 days later, I also experienced lower back pain intermittent bouts of diarrhea and myalgia for one or two days. last night (9 days post encounter) I was sweating profusely and I had to wake up and change sheets!..Im really worried that I may have contracted HIV( ARS symptoms suggest) or HSV 2! To my questions:
1. What is the risk of having contracted HIV ( my penis may have been chafed from previous day's masturbation)
2. how long should i wait to do comrehensive HIV and STD tests?
10 days ago, i had unprotected oral sex and protected vaginal sex with a CSW in Cameroon. Given the high HIV and STD's prevalence rates in Africa im pretty worried that i may have contracted HIV or some other form of STD.
2days after the encounter i noticed a itchy, kind of tingling sensation in my genitals.I didnt think much of it till i came down with a fever 3 days later, I also experienced lower back pain intermittent bouts of diarrhea and myalgia for one or two days. last night (9 days post encounter) I was sweating profusely and I had to wake up and change sheets!..Im really worried that I may have contracted HIV( ARS symptoms suggest) or HSV 2! To my questions:
1. What is the risk of having contracted HIV ( my penis may have been chafed from previous day's masturbation)
2. how long should i wait to do comrehensive HIV and STD tests?
you have been assessed as not having a risk for contracting hiv from what you have described.
kindly move on...this forum has nothing more to offer.
kindly move on...this forum has nothing more to offer.
Also forgot to mention that i have sore throat that's on and off. Plus i took an elisa test (for HIV) yesterday (28 days post exposure). How accurate would this be.. or was it a waste of time?
I would love to think that my risk overall (both unprotected oral and protected vaginal) is quite low, however i still continue to experience flu like symptoms ( Chills and night sweats & diarrhea) and have lost considerable weight in the last 3 weeks, I also have this dull pain in my butt cheeks. Im really hoping these are due to herpes( at worst), coz im really really scared of catching HIV.. Please advise
In the interest of the poster let's leave it at that.
I think we all accept, as in Emily's post above that the risk from oral sex is too low to be wasting so much time on it. Our differences are in wordings. No need to be going round in circles over logical issues.
The poster has been adviced correctly by all.
I think we all accept, as in Emily's post above that the risk from oral sex is too low to be wasting so much time on it. Our differences are in wordings. No need to be going round in circles over logical issues.
The poster has been adviced correctly by all.
what you read online ,lets say on avert is based on theoretical methods of transmission..
its even given that oral sex is a way of transmission if the person has cuts,ulcers blah blah in my medical books..
but it really does not happen in real life....thats why most experts consider oral sex no risk as they dont see people gettin infected this way
its even given that oral sex is a way of transmission if the person has cuts,ulcers blah blah in my medical books..
but it really does not happen in real life....thats why most experts consider oral sex no risk as they dont see people gettin infected this way
Let's all chill on the semantics, HIV backgrounds, etc etc.
On MedHelp, we follow the guidelines set by the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), test manufacturers, FDA, and our experts, Drs. HHH and Hook, and the experts in the HIV International Forum.
It is this forum's position that oral sex by itself does not require testing.
Lizzie, Teak, Vance, etc., all have some great quotes taken from our experts about the risks of oral sex and HIV, which I have included. While one study may say one thing, and another says something else, there is no disagreement among our experts about HIV and oral sex. Our forum experts are world-renowned, and have the ability to interpret situations and apply the science behind studies, etc., and they all agree on the risks (or non-risks) of oral sex for HIV.
If someone chooses to abstain from oral sex, or use a condom for oral sex (which is a good idea as other STDs can be transmitted via oral sex - see the STD community about that), or test after an oral sex encounter, that's a personal decision. However, our stance remains the same. There is no need for endless debate and insults about intelligence, education, backgrounds, etc.
Here are the quotes:
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 belive 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
Emily
MedHelp
On MedHelp, we follow the guidelines set by the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), test manufacturers, FDA, and our experts, Drs. HHH and Hook, and the experts in the HIV International Forum.
It is this forum's position that oral sex by itself does not require testing.
Lizzie, Teak, Vance, etc., all have some great quotes taken from our experts about the risks of oral sex and HIV, which I have included. While one study may say one thing, and another says something else, there is no disagreement among our experts about HIV and oral sex. Our forum experts are world-renowned, and have the ability to interpret situations and apply the science behind studies, etc., and they all agree on the risks (or non-risks) of oral sex for HIV.
If someone chooses to abstain from oral sex, or use a condom for oral sex (which is a good idea as other STDs can be transmitted via oral sex - see the STD community about that), or test after an oral sex encounter, that's a personal decision. However, our stance remains the same. There is no need for endless debate and insults about intelligence, education, backgrounds, etc.
Here are the quotes:
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 belive 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
Emily
MedHelp
Sorry i appreciate your emotional dimension to this but I will not be pushed over on facts and intellectual matters.
Sorry you selectively read and post article that tell you what you want others to believe. How about the info in the links I sent you, is there something there that contradicts my position on this, that the risk is not zero?
Here is an extract from http://www.avert.org/oral-sex.htm
The risk of HIV transmission from an infected partner through oral sex is much smaller than the risk of HIV transmission from anal or vaginal sex. Because of this, measuring the exact risk of HIV transmission as a result of oral sex is very difficult. In addition, since most sexually active individuals practice oral sex in addition to other forms of sex (such as vaginal and/or anal sex) when transmission occurs, it is difficult to determine whether or not it occurred as a result of oral sex or other more risky sexual activities. Finally, several co-factors can increase the risk of HIV transmission through oral sex, including oral ulcers and wounds, bleeding gums, genital sores, genital or oral piercings, and the presence of other STDs.
When scientists describe the risk of transmitting an infectious disease, like HIV, the term "theoretical risk" is often used. Very simply, "theoretical risk" means that passing an infection from one person to another is possible, even though there may not yet be any actual documented cases. "Theoretical risk" is not the same as likelihood. In other words, stating that HIV infection is "theoretically possible" does not necessarily mean it is likely to happen - only that it might. Documented risk, on the other hand, is used to describe transmission that has actually occurred, been investigated, and documented in the scientific literature.
Various scientific studies have been performed around the world to try and document and study instances of HIV transmission through oral sex. A programme in San Francisco studied 198 people, nearly all gay or bisexual men. The subjects stated that they had only had oral sex for a year, from six months preceding the six-month study to its end. 20 per cent of the study participants (39 people) reported performing oral sex on partners they knew to be HIV positive. 35 of those did not use a condom and 16 reported swallowing semen. No one became HIV positive during the study, although the small number of participants performing oral sex on HIV positive partners meant the researchers could only say that there was a less than 2.8 per cent chance of infection through oral sex over a year.1 In 2000, a different San Francisco study of gay men who had recently acquired HIV infection found that 7.8 per cent of these infections were attributed to oral sex.2 However, the results of the study have since been called into question due to the reliability of the participants' data.
Measuring the exact risk of HIV transmission as a result of oral sex is very difficult.
In June 2002, a study conducted amongst 135 HIV negative Spanish heterosexuals, who were in a sexual relationship with a person who was HIV positive, reported that over 19,000 instances of unprotected oral sex had not led to any cases of HIV transmission.3 The study also looked at contributing factors that could affect the potential transmission of HIV through oral sex. They monitored viral load and asked questions such as whether ejaculation in the mouth occurred and how good oral health was. Amongst HIV positive men, 34 per cent had ejaculated into the mouths of their partners. Viral load levels were available for 60 people in the study, 10 per cent of whom had levels over 10,000 copies. Nearly 16 per cent of the HIV positive people had CD4 counts below 200. The study, conducted over a ten year period between 1990 and 2000, adds to the growing number of studies which suggest varying levels of risk of HIV transmission from oral sex when compared to anal or vaginal intercourse.
At the 4th International Oral AIDS Conference held in South Africa, the risk of transmission through oral sex was estimated to be approximately 0.04 per cent per contact.4 This percentage figure is a lot lower than the two American figures, because this figure is a risk per contact percentage, whereas the other figures are percentage risks over much longer time periods. Oral sex is still regarded as a low-risk sexual activity in terms of HIV transmission, but only when more work is done will we be clearer as to the risks of oral sex.
Here is an extract from http://www.avert.org/oral-sex.htm
The risk of HIV transmission from an infected partner through oral sex is much smaller than the risk of HIV transmission from anal or vaginal sex. Because of this, measuring the exact risk of HIV transmission as a result of oral sex is very difficult. In addition, since most sexually active individuals practice oral sex in addition to other forms of sex (such as vaginal and/or anal sex) when transmission occurs, it is difficult to determine whether or not it occurred as a result of oral sex or other more risky sexual activities. Finally, several co-factors can increase the risk of HIV transmission through oral sex, including oral ulcers and wounds, bleeding gums, genital sores, genital or oral piercings, and the presence of other STDs.
When scientists describe the risk of transmitting an infectious disease, like HIV, the term "theoretical risk" is often used. Very simply, "theoretical risk" means that passing an infection from one person to another is possible, even though there may not yet be any actual documented cases. "Theoretical risk" is not the same as likelihood. In other words, stating that HIV infection is "theoretically possible" does not necessarily mean it is likely to happen - only that it might. Documented risk, on the other hand, is used to describe transmission that has actually occurred, been investigated, and documented in the scientific literature.
Various scientific studies have been performed around the world to try and document and study instances of HIV transmission through oral sex. A programme in San Francisco studied 198 people, nearly all gay or bisexual men. The subjects stated that they had only had oral sex for a year, from six months preceding the six-month study to its end. 20 per cent of the study participants (39 people) reported performing oral sex on partners they knew to be HIV positive. 35 of those did not use a condom and 16 reported swallowing semen. No one became HIV positive during the study, although the small number of participants performing oral sex on HIV positive partners meant the researchers could only say that there was a less than 2.8 per cent chance of infection through oral sex over a year.1 In 2000, a different San Francisco study of gay men who had recently acquired HIV infection found that 7.8 per cent of these infections were attributed to oral sex.2 However, the results of the study have since been called into question due to the reliability of the participants' data.
Measuring the exact risk of HIV transmission as a result of oral sex is very difficult.
In June 2002, a study conducted amongst 135 HIV negative Spanish heterosexuals, who were in a sexual relationship with a person who was HIV positive, reported that over 19,000 instances of unprotected oral sex had not led to any cases of HIV transmission.3 The study also looked at contributing factors that could affect the potential transmission of HIV through oral sex. They monitored viral load and asked questions such as whether ejaculation in the mouth occurred and how good oral health was. Amongst HIV positive men, 34 per cent had ejaculated into the mouths of their partners. Viral load levels were available for 60 people in the study, 10 per cent of whom had levels over 10,000 copies. Nearly 16 per cent of the HIV positive people had CD4 counts below 200. The study, conducted over a ten year period between 1990 and 2000, adds to the growing number of studies which suggest varying levels of risk of HIV transmission from oral sex when compared to anal or vaginal intercourse.
At the 4th International Oral AIDS Conference held in South Africa, the risk of transmission through oral sex was estimated to be approximately 0.04 per cent per contact.4 This percentage figure is a lot lower than the two American figures, because this figure is a risk per contact percentage, whereas the other figures are percentage risks over much longer time periods. Oral sex is still regarded as a low-risk sexual activity in terms of HIV transmission, but only when more work is done will we be clearer as to the risks of oral sex.
the stand on this forum is oral sex is not a risk..this is based on the views of the doctors here and also by the info that Teak posted earlier..
so that is what Teak is trying to enforce here..so it is not appropriate if you keep arguing about oral sex and its potential risks..maybe you should take it to another forum where oral sex is given a lot of importance..but dont continue it here as it does make the people following this forum anxious and worried for no reason at all...
we are here to help people...dont be a reason to defeat that purpose..stop this and show some respect to the people in this forum or you can take your argument to another forum
so that is what Teak is trying to enforce here..so it is not appropriate if you keep arguing about oral sex and its potential risks..maybe you should take it to another forum where oral sex is given a lot of importance..but dont continue it here as it does make the people following this forum anxious and worried for no reason at all...
we are here to help people...dont be a reason to defeat that purpose..stop this and show some respect to the people in this forum or you can take your argument to another forum
Your posts are not factual nor are they correct and it is up to those that ARE educated in HIV transmission to get the correct information to those that have a concern about their possible risks and to make corrections to those that post incorrect information with scientific fact.
Then you need to be in an instructor's forum if you are not flexible enough to appreciate the points being made by other members.
I have reached a balanced view after reading all the facts on oral sex with an infected person. Telling a poster to ignore my comments is not appreciated.
I have reached a balanced view after reading all the facts on oral sex with an infected person. Telling a poster to ignore my comments is not appreciated.
http://www.sfcityclinic.org/drk/oralsex4.asp
QUESTION
I was wondering how safe oral sex is -- both giving and receiving.
ANSWER
Questions about oral sex are probably the most common ones we get. In terms of HIV, oral sex both ways is very safe. The University of California San Francisco and the San Francisco Dept. of Public Health just completed a study of men in San Francisco who have only had oral sex and found zero new HIV infections. A very recent study from Spain confirmed earlier studies that oral sex is safe sex in terms of HIV. However, there are case reports and individual experiences that support that HIV can be transmitted through oral sex, although rarely. As far as whether oral sex is riskier if you swallow, truthfully no one really knows.
What's important is that other STDs like syphilis, gonorrhea, chlamydia and herpes are definitely transmitted through oral sex, and oral sex has likely contributed to San Francisco's current syphilis outbreak. Many of these infections are easily diagnosed with simple tests and can be treated with available medications.
So my advice is: Enjoy oral sex and get regular check-ups. A good check-up includes throat testing for gonorrhea, rectal testing for gonorrhea and chlamydia, urine testing for gonorrhea and chlamydia and blood tests for herpes, syphilis and HIV. We call that the grand slam!
QUESTION
I was wondering how safe oral sex is -- both giving and receiving.
ANSWER
Questions about oral sex are probably the most common ones we get. In terms of HIV, oral sex both ways is very safe. The University of California San Francisco and the San Francisco Dept. of Public Health just completed a study of men in San Francisco who have only had oral sex and found zero new HIV infections. A very recent study from Spain confirmed earlier studies that oral sex is safe sex in terms of HIV. However, there are case reports and individual experiences that support that HIV can be transmitted through oral sex, although rarely. As far as whether oral sex is riskier if you swallow, truthfully no one really knows.
What's important is that other STDs like syphilis, gonorrhea, chlamydia and herpes are definitely transmitted through oral sex, and oral sex has likely contributed to San Francisco's current syphilis outbreak. Many of these infections are easily diagnosed with simple tests and can be treated with available medications.
So my advice is: Enjoy oral sex and get regular check-ups. A good check-up includes throat testing for gonorrhea, rectal testing for gonorrhea and chlamydia, urine testing for gonorrhea and chlamydia and blood tests for herpes, syphilis and HIV. We call that the grand slam!
I have never stated I was an expert. I'm an instructor in HIV and what Emily was referring to was the doctors in both the Expert forums.
Here are facts to read on oral sex with infected persons.
http://aids.about.com/cs/safesex/a/oralsex.htm
http://www.avert.org/oral-sex.htm
http://aids.about.com/cs/safesex/a/oralsex.htm
http://www.avert.org/oral-sex.htm
I disagree with your statement.
This is not the expert forum. It is irrelevant to talk about educational credentials here. If you are an expert then you are in the wrong forum.
Here members share their experiences, views and opinion with others, as well as being supportive.
by Emily_MHModerator, May 06, 2010 03:47PM
Our stance remains the same. As the experts here have said, oral sex is not a risk for HIV.
http://www.medhelp.org/posts/HIV-Prevention/rapid-hiv-duo-test-neg-at-8-weeks-how-accurate/show/1234375?personal_page_id=348931#post_5653166
Our stance remains the same. As the experts here have said, oral sex is not a risk for HIV.
http://www.medhelp.org/posts/HIV-Prevention/rapid-hiv-duo-test-neg-at-8-weeks-how-accurate/show/1234375?personal_page_id=348931#post_5653166
I maintain a different view on oral sex with an infected individual. That is the risk is very, very, very (exceptionally) LOW if certain opportunistic circumstances exits. Hence, it is not a zero risk.
your "symptoms" are irrelevant and in NO WAY related to hiv infection.
kindly move on...you do not have a hiv concern.
kindly move on...you do not have a hiv concern.
Have an Answer?
You are reading content posted in the HIV Prevention Community
Condoms are the most effective way to prevent HIV and STDs.
PrEP is used by people with high risk to prevent HIV infection.
Can I get HIV from surfaces, like toilet seats?
Can you get HIV from casual contact, like hugging?
Frequency of HIV testing depends on your risk.
Post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) may help prevent HIV infection.
