ARS Fever ? for Teak & Others

[eastern4200]

I'm posting this because I've found reassurance on this site that the flu-like symptoms I experienced 5 weeks post-incident weren't ARS. My risk was 2 mins of unprotected receptve oral with a male (I'm a male), no ejaculation. 5 weeks later, I came down with the flu -- I felt sick and tired, stayed home from work, but the main symtpom was a low fever. (ranged from 99.2 - 100.2 -- but since my normal body temperature is usually about 97.0, that seems like a more significant jump?).

Anyway, I've seen comments from Teak and others here that fever associated with ARS is severe (>101) and persistent. But looking around, this is not what I find elsewhere. For example, the Johns Hopkins site (http://www.hopkins-hivguide.org/diagnosis/miscellaneous/primary_hiv_infection.html) characterizes ARS as ""a flu-like illness similar to other viral syndromes (e.g. influenza, mononucleosis) with low-grade fever, malaise, and headache." This site (http://www.fpnotebook.com/HIV/Exam/HvPrsntn.htm) says the same thing. And I think this is a case study involving someone with a low-grade fever and ARS (http://sciencelinks.jp/j-east/article/200624/000020062406A0973239.php).

Can Teak or someone else clear this up? It seems like low-grade fever IS compatible with ARS, not just really high fevers. Plus, I saw TEak post that his own expereince involved no ARS. So if that's possible, why wouldn't it be pssible (even common) for someone's ARS to be something between non-existent and a fever of more than 102?

[Teak]

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.

[eastern4200]

I'm curious how you can say that. The reason I've been so nervous is that just about everything I've seen and read suggests there is a risk in performing oral sex on a male. Not as major a risk as anal sex, but not no risk either....and more of a risk than receiving oral sex.

[LIZZIE LOU]

not at all

[eastern4200]

Performing unprotected oral on a male isn't a risk at all?

[Teak]

You never had a risk.

[LIZZIE LOU]

before someone can have ars...they have to be infected.  before someone can become infected...they have to have been exposed to the virus.

you were NEVER at risk.