Exactly Teak!
Mak...we deal with facts on this forum. Either someone had a risk or they didn't. This would be a risk, albeit probably a low one.
You just don't want to confuse people with statements like "it could be argued that it is zero".
A risk is a risk and the only way to know your status is by testing.
Yup NG but i said it can be argue..... yes i was wrong but i dont think so this slimiest exposure Will Lead to positive consequences of HIV TEST .... It is very highly unlikely.
That's why I said "expect a negative".
You can not say that, because an exposure was brief, it could be "zero". That's misleading.
NG you are correct but think so, OP chances are like a meteor hit him while he was writing this post but i should also advice to collect a conclusive result at 3 months from exposure and i am much sure it will be negative.
ANY unprotected penetrative intercourse (anal or vaginal) would be a risk. The brevity of the exposure would decrease the significance of risk...but never would it be a ZERO risk exposure.
I would advise testing at 3 months. Expect a negative.
Tony,
If he penetrated you for less then a second then YES, it would be a slight risk but it may argue to zero.