WOW you didn't even read my post and sure wrote a lot that graphically looks like it is a reply to what I said, but in reality is completely irrelevant.
Yes there are lots of people with HIV, but they are mostly homosexuals and injection drug users. Really. There are indeed some HIV positive heterosexuals, but many, many fewer. The odds that your hetrosexual partner has HIV are very low, unless your partner is also an injection drug user, or a bisexual male.
Yes, women can get infected from hetrosexual contact--but it is almost always unprotected anal or vaginal sex, whereas we were talking about blowjobs.
So maybe re-read my post, that you quoted, and reply again, having read it.
I am so sorry fuji, did I not break it down in tiny enough bites for you? Let me try again.
And lets remember the basic question did not focus on HIV, nor did it even focus on STIs that could not be cured. It was a simple statement. "BBBJ = 5 to 6% chance of being infected" and the basic response from some people who seem to have at least a little medical training is "Sounds about right". Those who want to have BBBJs insist it is a very minute chance. [/QUOTE]
Saliva is fairly effective at neutralizing the HIV virus which is why all forms of oral transmission have very low risks.
Well yes and no. Go read the studies and not just the headlines. The human mouth is one of the dirtiest biologically active place imaginable, pathogens abound. SOME studies show that SOME pathogens are inhibited by saliva IF the pathogen is exposed to saliva for a long period of time (hours)Saliva is not an antiviral drug. . Further the throat is not the mouth when it comes to saliva. Once your little urethra opening is in the throat it is exposed to all kinds of nasty pathogens. That is why the risk of DATY is so low for many diseases, No throat contact is infinity safer. Read any of the hundreds of papers on gono transmission to men during oral sex. Most apply to any disease that is fond of mucous membranes, the mechanism applies to many diseases and research on HIV is ongoing.
So now let's bring this back to the thread topic and introduce a little reality.
Here is the scenario: A female escort provides a blow job to a male client and then has protected vaginal sex. The risks to both parties of contracting HIV here are negligible.
And lets remember the basic question did not focus on HIV, nor did it even focus on STIs that could not be cured. It was a simple statement. "BBBJ = 5 to 6% chance of being infected" and the basic response from some people who seem to have at least a little medical training is "Sounds about right". Those who want to have BBBJs insist it is a very minute chance.
There are several "for life" STIs there, and a few fatal ones. The question was about total risk of infection. Just to get back to reality
First, you are dealing with two individuals who are both highly unlikely to be infected AND serum positive.
You do realise that is a mildly stupid statement? It is impossible to be serum positive unless you are infected. Why do you say silly things?
Even just ignoring the transmission rates, the rates of infection in these populations are so low that the risks are small to begin with.
As I quoted the odds of meeting an HIV + person is about 1/300. (CDC DATA FACT SHEETS)
the only rate that matters are those who aren't receiving treatment for HIV, which lowers it even further from just the rate of frequency in the population.
do you have any peer reviewed papers that support this ?
You do know that the clowns that were charged with assault for having sex with women and not telling them they had HIV were all diagnosed and receiving treatment? The courts found them guilty because of the risk to the women. None of the defence lawyers tried to use your idea as a defence. Guess why?
Your opinion that someone receiving treatment has no risk of infecting others is interesting, not universally true, certainly not proven in research papers but interesting.
Second, the guy has almost no risk here. HIV may transmit to someone who gets a load of cum in their mouth, but it doesn't go the other direction easily--the rates are low even for vaginal sex, and for oral sex, where saliva has already inactivated most of the virus present, the odds are just incredibly low unless the woman is bleeding profusely from her gums or something.
That is just plain silly. Ever notice a little red tinge when you spit after brushing your teeth? That is more than enough all by itself to keep you infectious for blood born pathogens for a long time Eventually saliva and clotting will lower the concentration, but we are talking hours. hardly "bleeding profusely" as you like to imagine. Stop living in the last century. True this is a life style disease, but it is no longer a homosexual / IV drug user problem.
Third, the transmission rate to the woman is low,
Again untrue ideas all tagged together so they sound logical. CDC published data sheet says 1/5 (approximately) of HIV infected people iare non drug using heterosexual woman in US. In Africa the numbers are even more obvious.
You are more likely to contract influenza in this scenario, and then die from it, than you are likely to contract HIV.
On the bright side I refuse to believe I can contract influenza from a washed penis.
As long as it is nothing to sneeze at (Joke)
Wrong end for influenza.
And finally let's just end on a common sense note: If this was in fact a major transmission vector for HIV then a whole hell of a lot of hetrosexual people would be infected,
Dahhh ya there are.
WOW you must be informed by some magical means.
Translation: "Wow this guy did not study Biology at University, or statistics, or critical thinking, and never wrote a university level thesis that was subject to peer review. "
do you have any peer reviewed papers that support this one way hypothesis?
Summary:
Pretty much everyone says there were about 1,148,200 people living with HIV in US. With a population of 308,745,538 that means 1/300
24% of the people with HIV are women (US 2009 -CDC Statistic fact sheets)
r
"New HIV infections among women are primarily attributed to heterosexual contact (84% in 2010) or injection drug
use (16% in 2010). CDC statistic sheets.
The only published paper I know of says oral transmission rates are 1/7th the odds of genital / anal contact. That assumes BB in all 3 cases.
Saliva does not support most pathogens (cavities do not live in saliva, but the exist in the mouth, go figure it out), but is far from a universal antiviral / antibacterial agent. If you think it is go DFK a dog.
The original question.... is it true that the odds are 5-6 % per BBBJ of catching a STI. Well if you do not already have it, yes it is a reasonable estimate.
