PERB In Need of Banner

BBBJ's are a high STD risk, even if not for HIV.

Dave in Phoenix

Active member
Jul 6, 2002
196
26
28
Phoenix AZ
www.sexworkcanada.com
BBBJ's are a high STD risk, even if not for HIV.

It is better to receive than to give. The "giver" (usually the women) has vastly higher STD risks than the receiver (usually the man) BBBJ often desired by men is high risk for the women. But men can also get STD's from oral sex and DATY.

In the U.S., Canada and most of the world, HIV never has been much of a risk for heterosexual males or their female partners, as long as the women is sure the male is not bisexual, or a iv drug user, since those are the only real risks for men.

But other STD's are a much more real issue. STD's are on increase at same time HIV/AIDS is declining. We are having lots of unprotected sex, especially oral sex. While AIDS is very isolated to certain risk groups, STD's are the real issue for the majority of the population.

Most other STD's other than Herpes, are fairly easy to cure IF you know you have it. Risk is higher for women if it goes undetected and men can pass it on to women not knowing they have an STD.

For blood borne STD's (including HIV) vaginal sex and anal sex is high risk since thrusting can cause a tear on penis or vagina. This can create an open wound which allows semen or vaginal fluid to enter the blood stream. A tear from thrusting, bodily fluid mixing with blood are the STD major risks. Anal sex is especially risky if the insertive partner is HIV infected since easy access to blood sources. But heterosexual males act as a block to HIV spread since they are usually not the receptive partner, or they would be bi or gay.

Herpes can be passed by skin contact and infection although mostly when a person is having an active outbreak. Herpes simplex virus (HSV) causes herpes. This virus has two types, HSV 1 and HSV 2. HSV 1 (oral herpes) usually causes infections on the lips or mouth (cold sores or fever blisters). HSV 2 (genital herpes) usually causes sores and blisters in the genital area. However, virus from the mouth can infect the genitals and virus from the genitals can infect the mouth. Herpes virus can also infect other parts of the body.

Nasty Gonorrhea is spread between penis and vagina (infection rate for males 30-50%, females 60-90%), penis to mouth, penis to rectum, mouth to vagina. The same with chlamydia which lives in vaginal fluid and in semen. Chlamydia is sometimes called the “silent” disease because you can have it and not know it. Can have serious complications in women if not treated.

Hepatitis B is a real concern for everyone since often you don't have any symptoms until there is serious liver damage. Hepatitis B is very contagious. Often it is at a subclinical level, with no symptoms but still contagious by saliva and most all body fluids. Everyone should get a Hepatitis B vaccine which consists of an initial shot and two follow-up shots. The cost should be about $150-$160 for the vaccine plus whatever the Dr. charges. But it is well worth it. The vaccine is about 70% effective. If the other 30% contract Hepatitis B, they usually will get a very mild case. Even more dangerous is the Delta strain. But it is usually only a risk if you also have Hepatitis B.

Women should get a pap smear every 6-12 months. This is vitally important, not only for STD's but for cervical cancer. The good news is that cervical cancer is very slow to grow, taking 8 years before it becomes very dangerous.

Women should also have a speculum and examine herself frequently. Many STD's, yeast infections etc. are easily seen. If you aren't totally "pink" see your doctor.

I was first introduced to speculums and the beauty of the female vagina many years ago at the Stan Dale workshops, but at that time they were controlled medical supplies that only a physician could obtain. I was thrilled to learn they are now readily available. I asked where, and someone suggested that many bondage supply exhibitors at the swing conventions had them. Yep, I brought home, from the Lifestyles Convention, both a metal and plastic version...now just need a woman to learn with. They don't look very vagina-friendly...those big tongs going in....but I'm told they aren't that bad to insert.

As a Provider in Phoenix said:
I agree this BBBJ phenomenon has got to end. I know you gents love it, but when are you going to wake up and realize you can catch numberous STD's? There are several ways to have fun and be safe. I know you just can't stand the condoms, but I just can't see how you would want to be part of a vicious circle of spreading these diseases.

I had a client come to me this year with a very terrible story. He had been with his wife for 5 years, married for three and completely faithful. The last year the marriage was falling apart and they stopped having sex. After the divorce he decided to see a provider at the recommendation of a friend. So he makes an appointment with a well reviewed provider and low and behold 3-5 days and a BBBJ later he has some major uhh issues down there. He goes to the doc and low and behold Gonnorhea! OUCH! First blow job in over a year and he gets left with a very sticky memory and a dose of antibiotics and a DR Bill. Talk about a horror story! My point is wouldn't you rather be safe than sorry?

Cover Story USA Today
Welcome to the US with STD rates 50 to 100 times greater than those of any industrialized nation.

Experts say much of the blame rests on a contradictory attitude toward sex. "It seems to be easier for Americans to engage in sex than to talk about it," says Dorothy Mann, executive director of the Family Planning Council of Philadelphia.

The article talks about the huge rise in chlamydia, herpes etc while at the same time new cases of AIDS are in a steady long-term decline. It also points out that women are disproportionately effected by STD's and while they are not as prevalent in men and often don't cause any major health problems they are much more serious if undetected in women. Long-term STD prevention will require a sexual revolution - based on frank discussion of sexuality.

Another article that I now wished I had saved talked about the studies in high schools that had frank sex discussions and availability of condoms and those that did not. The results were clear - honest discussion about sex and using condoms did not result in more teenagers having sex, but resulted in a dramatic decrease in STDs' among students who had honest sex education and for whom condoms were made available.
 

shak

New member
Apr 4, 2004
524
0
0
Dave in Phoenix said:
In the U.S., Canada and most of the world, HIV never has been much of a risk for heterosexual males or their female partners, as long as the women is sure the male is not bisexual, or a iv drug user, since those are the only real risks for men.

But other STD's are a much more real issue. STD's are on increase at same time HIV/AIDS is declining. We are having lots of unprotected sex, especially oral sex. While AIDS is very isolated to certain risk groups, STD's are the real issue for the majority of the population.
Agree with most of what you've said. But this is wrong, the majority of new HIV infections occurs thru heterosexual sex. Anyone could get infected, its not isolated to certain risk group. Reference available upon request...
 

michel

The Ultimate DDloverman
Jun 23, 2002
576
0
0
65
www.akiraweb.com
curious about MP

How about activities like MP without FS -- like HJ, Touching and breast sucking ? Are these higher risk or ?

Curious :confused:
 

Very Veronica

Banned
Aug 2, 2004
1,768
7
0
Vancouver
I can only hope that everyone is going to their health professional for the real facts on sexually transmitted diseases & pelvic exams. Layperson (no pun intended) online forums are pretty irresponsible places to be dispensing or getting serious medical info.

Furthermore, if anyone but a doctor or nurse trained to do cervical exams came at me with a speculum, i'd make sure they ended up in a straight jacket.
 

Cosmo

Riddle's unwrapped enigma
Jul 30, 2003
506
1
18
115
Very Veronica said:
Furthermore, if anyone but a doctor or nurse trained to do cervical exams came at me with a speculum, i'd make sure they ended up in a straight jacket.
And here I thought everything was for sale?
 

leopold

New member
May 21, 2004
1
0
0
Reducing the risk

Since BBBJs are common, pooners should do what they can to minimize the risk to them and the pooning community. From mdderma.com:

5. Does washing after sex help to prevent STD?

Theoretically, yes. Soap and water can inactivate or at least wash away STD germs before they have had a chance to enter the body. However, douching is not advisable. Some doctors feel that douching upsets the normal vagina environment and makes it easier for germs to establish themselves. Douching may also push germs further up the vagina and increase the risk of infection.

6. Does urinating after sex help prevent STD?

Urinating is useful in the male because the urine may help flush away any STD germs that have not penetrated the lining of the urethra (urine pipe). It is less useful in women because infection ususally occurs inside the vagina and urine does not flush this area.

Yes it is easier to be a guy, but remember to do what your mommies told you. Take a pee and wash up as soon as you can. While some debate exists on nonoxynal-9 - some studies suggest it can induce vaginal lesions - it still is proven to kill the pathogens of other STIs such as genital herpes, gonorrhea, syphilis, trichomoniasis and chlamydia. If you're taking the risk on the road, carry some N-9 gel and a paper towel.
 

Lolita

Banned
Dec 12, 2002
371
0
0
leopold said:
Since BBBJs are common, pooners should do what they can to minimize the risk to them and the pooning community.

Yes it is easier to be a guy, but remember to do what your mommies told you. Take a pee and wash up as soon as you can. While some debate exists on nonoxynal-9 - some studies suggest it can induce vaginal lesions - it still is proven to kill the pathogens of other STIs such as genital herpes, gonorrhea, syphilis, trichomoniasis and chlamydia. If you're taking the risk on the road, carry some N-9 gel and a paper towel.

Not true. Nonoxynal-9 is a spermicide. It kills sperm not bacteria, viruses or fungi. And has been proven to enable and encourage the growth of plethora of viruses not to mention can cause yeast infections.
 

Dave in Phoenix

Active member
Jul 6, 2002
196
26
28
Phoenix AZ
www.sexworkcanada.com
shak said:
the majority of new HIV infections occurs thru heterosexual sex. Anyone could get infected, its not isolated to certain risk group. Reference available upon request...
Please reference this. Is totally wrong in the U.S. and last time I saw Canadian data. New cases of HIV has been on the decline for years until a recent increase due to bi men not thinking they are at risk since they are not gay, but anal sex very high risk.

Also:
Update on HIV race gap
USA Today 6/14/05 article shows huge increase in HIV amoung gay and bi youths especially black and says:

Some activists experssed anger that the federal government hadn't done more to contain the epidemic amoung blacks. "I can't express the outrage and concern I have for black gay men in this country," says Gary English of the Brooklyn-based AIDS organization People of Color in Crisis.

Racial Gap in HIV Cases - per 100,000

Black Males 103.4
Black Females 53
Hispanic Males 40.4
Hispanic Females 10.9
White Males 15.2
White Females 2.9

The data continues also to show that most of the HIV risk is with gay men, bisexual men and their female partners as well of course is sharing drug needles.

The real problem in some cultures in that bi males refuse to think they have high risk when having anal sex with other males.
This is unbelievable ignorance but true:

HIV in Az Truckers
Example of why Bi Men increasingly getting HIV - Since they think anal sex is safe if they don't consider themselve gay! How accredibly dumb and right here in AZ not a third world country where this ignorance is so common.

Across State Lines - Truckers and HIV
Yorghos Apostolopoulos, a sociology Ph.D and a researcher at the Emory University School of Medicine in Atlanta, has been studying the spread of the HIV virus between truckers through behavior patterns and networks - with astonishing results. Backed by the National Institutes of Health, Apostolopoulos launched a mission to determine in the United States what had already been found in sub-Saharan Africa: that many truck drivers become infected on the job. Alongside a squad of ethnographers in 2001, researchers began to study the phenomena of rural truck stop interaction in Phoenix, Arizona.

The study also deduced that some truck drivers - when questioned about their knowledge on AIDS - indicated a belief that condoms were ineffective in prevention of the disease, and that AIDS was only a threat to gay males. It should come as no surprise, then, that straight-identified male truckers who participate in sex with other men feel relatively safe from contracting the HIV virus.

According to Donna Smith, one of Emory University's researchers, "Many of these truckers identify as straight. Because they define risk as being associated with identity - and because they are not gay - they believe they are not at risk. We've collected ethnographies in which truck chasers are asked by truckers, 'Are you married?' They perceive safety in a sexual encounter with another married man."

One truck-chaser in particular revealed in an interview with Apostolopoulous, "Sometimes [truckers] will ask you if you are married because sometimes they feel safer having sex with other married men. I don't know why they think they are not going to contract HIV from having sex with other married men. I think they feel like they are not having sex with gay men, so it is going to be okay."

And as far as knowledge about protection against HIV goes, another truck-chaser declared, "It's definitely a trust issue. Using condoms means no trust. I carry condoms, so if someone asks, then yes, I'll use it. But I never take it out myself. I do look their bodies over for karposis sarcoma, drainage, red marks, anything out of the ordinary. I don't do anything unless I can see their body. But I'm trained in health."

The Emory research team called the truck-chaser's confidence that he could tell if someone was HIV-positive by looking at them, "a shocking level of ignorance regarding HIV transmission."

One prostitute, when asked what she did if a customer refused the use of prophylactics, reportedly responded, "Well, I make sure I use baby wipes."
 

Dave in Phoenix

Active member
Jul 6, 2002
196
26
28
Phoenix AZ
www.sexworkcanada.com
More U.S. data, and I am quite sure its similar in Canada:

HIV can transfer female to male via sex, but it is very difficult and rare absent other risk factors. If the Female is HIV+ and man has open std sores on penis it can pass, although the concentration in vaginal fluid is very low...if on period could be higher risk.

In the U.S., and most of the world, the heterosexual risk factor is extremely low for males. It is higher for females since if their partner is bisexual or injecting drug user it can easily transmit to a female via anal sex.

Here is my latest summary - as of 12/31/03 Report updated March 2005- Source CDC Surveillance Report

As of 12/31/03 only 13% of males with HIV is in the category of heterosexual contact. As prior reports have shown, this is most certainly overstated since many men will claim to be heterosexual although they are actually bi and have had anal sex with men, but won't admit in it a survey. Or, they be using illegal drugs but will not admit it.

There are also huge racial differences due to culture - i.e. many African men do anal sex with other men but not all the time, so they claim to be heterosexual. That may be why there is such a huge disperportionate numbers of black males with HIV vs White.

Of White Males only 5% of total male HIV cases are classified (probably overly) as Heterosexual contact.

Prior to 2002, the CDC data shows the percentage of heterosexuals getting HIV without any other risk factors is too low to even have its own category (classified as other)... very low % and concentration of cases is also very large in certain cities (with high drug rates). More recently, they have dropped the allocation of multiple categories of risk so some of these "heterosexual" contacts may also do drugs, but their prime claimed risk factor is heterosexual sex (and may not admit to illegal drug use which inflates the heterosexual numbers).
 

Dave in Phoenix

Active member
Jul 6, 2002
196
26
28
Phoenix AZ
www.sexworkcanada.com
michel said:
How about activities like MP without FS -- like HJ, Touching and breast sucking ? Are these higher risk or ? Curious :confused:
No but fingering a provider can spread nasty bacteria. I know a provider that got a serious infection she traces she is quite sure to a guy fingering her after he won't take no for an answer.
 

Dave in Phoenix

Active member
Jul 6, 2002
196
26
28
Phoenix AZ
www.sexworkcanada.com
Very Veronica said:
I can only hope that everyone is going to their health professional for the real facts on sexually transmitted diseases & pelvic exams
I agree about Pelvic exams... although actually looking at a vagina with a speculum can be very educational and new respect for the beauty of the organ. How many women have even seen inside their vaginas, how pink they are, different structures if you have had surgeries etc. Hard for a women to see her own without being a pretzel. Can do it with a mirror more easily.

A health professional will answer questions on the "safe" side. For example may simply say all sex is a risk factor for HIV. While techically correct there are HUGE differences in the relative risk with heterosexual sex with a female or for female a non drug injecting, non bi male is probably lower risk of HIV than getting killed in a car accident. To me that is why real statistics and medical reasons for low HIV risk for heterosexuals is far better advice than what a typical health professsional might say to be "safe".
 
Last edited:

GetHappy

Just "Happy" now
Sep 6, 2005
25
0
0
Wherever I stand, there I am
Man, I never thought pooning would require so much math.

And if we need to lighten the mood on this thread, just remeber the logic behind God being a lesbian (gay men get AIDS, Straight couples get children). It's an old joke, but hey, it's late.

zzzzz....zzzzz.....lezzz.....zzzzz.....mmmmm
 

Dave in Phoenix

Active member
Jul 6, 2002
196
26
28
Phoenix AZ
www.sexworkcanada.com
Nonoxynol 9
I remember the days when Nonoxynol 9 was the accepted protection method against HIV and other STD's because in a test tube it killed the HIV and other STD's. Even baby wipes had it and at Stan Dale Workshops it was promoted as the most effective way to kill HIV and STD's.

BUT by the mid 90's medical data was showing in real life (not just a test tube) it actually increased the HIV risk in women by causing small disruptions in the vaginal cell wall. In studies released staring in 1998 (Roddy et al.) and in 2000 (Van Damme) and in 2002 (Roddy et al.) results showed no protection against common bacterial STD's such as gonorrhea and chlamydia. As a result the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and the World Health Organization concluded that Nonoxynol 9 products should not be promoted for STD protection.

Today Nonoxynol 9 is back to its original use - as an active ingredient in most over-the-counter birth control products for women with low HIV risk in the U.S. and Canada. Nonoxynol 9 works well as a contraceptive because it disrupts the sperms outer membrane, thereby deactivating it.

Evidence suggests that it is safe for women at low risk of HIV to continue to use spermicides containing N-9 for birth control purposes. Women who may be at risk of HIV and who plan to use the product more than once a day should consider switching to another form of birth control.

Apparently, the irritating effects of N-9 are dependent on dose and frequency of product use. Studies that have looked specifically at vaginal irritation have demonstrated that epithelial disruption is related to the frequency of product use, with lower dose products (52-150 mg.) causing little or no disruption when used once a day or less (Niruthisard 1992; Roddy 1993; Stevens et al. 1996).

Surprisingly, the sensation of "irritation" does not correlate well with actual microscopic or laboratory evidence of epithelial disruption. Thus, not all women who experience "irritation" actually have epithelial disruption or inflammation. Likewise, a woman may have lesions or disruption but not experience a sensation of irritation.

Source: http://www.global-campaign.org/whatsup_with_n9.htm updated 10/18/05
 

shak

New member
Apr 4, 2004
524
0
0
First of all, we have to get one assumption straight. Just in case, I didnt made myself clear in my previous post or you misunderstood what I was trying to say.

US/Canada, do have a lower heterosexual infection rate compare to the world average. However; I contribute this to better education and awareness of HIV. This does not mean the risk of getting HIV through heterosexual contact is lower in US/Canada, the new infection rate are lower in US/Canada because people learned to used condoms. The risk remain the same.


BC CDC HIV Report 2003
Scroll down to page 6, table 1.5. They break down the new AIDS case report by gender,risk category,and year of diagnosis. We can see that in year 2003, we have a total of 75 new reported case. Only 5 were attributed to MSM and 5 were attributed for heterosexual contact.

Safer Sex
This is a break down of the risk associated with different method of sex. One of the best article about HIV I ever read. Scroll down to Penile-Vaginal paragraph and you can see
Penile-Vaginal Sex

Heterosexual intercourse is presumed to be the most common mode of HIV infection worldwide. Studies of male-to-female and female-to-male transmission provide strong epidemiologic evidence that heterosexual transmission of HIV does occur via penile-vaginal intercourse.
All in all,what I am saying here is anyone can be susceptible to HIV/AIDS, regardless of their sexual orientation. Everyone is at risk of getting HIV from blood-to-blood contact, sharing needles or unsafe sex. Worldwide, HIV is spread most often through heterosexual contact. It is not isolated to a particular risk group. In US/Canada, lower heterosexual infection rate doesnt mean your chance of catching HIV thru heterosexual contact is low.
 

Dave in Phoenix

Active member
Jul 6, 2002
196
26
28
Phoenix AZ
www.sexworkcanada.com
Shak
And the article further states, " Per-act infectivity in two studies (62,63) was found to be low: 0.0005 and 0.0009 for male-to-female transmission, and 0.0003 and 0.0001 for female-to-male transmission."

The facts are there is virtually no female-male spread in U.S., Canada (your stats on rates are so low as to be not meaningful), Japan, Austraila or most any country outside of Africa.

The differences between U.S., Canada and Africa isn't just about education, but of cultural differences.

In Africa anal sex is used for birth control, as your article pointed out non circumcised males have been show to be at higher risk, and there are far more untreated STD infections including genital ulcer disease - sores on penis and vagina which makes spread easier. And many reported heterosexual cases are really from bi males who got it from anal sex with males.

It simply is very hard to transmit female to male with intact genitals without STD sores. As your article pointed out it is much easier to pass male to female although still low vaginally. But the man would have to be doing high risk activities to be HIV+ and a risk to his female partner.

Thailand had a great example of drastic reduction in HIV and other STD's by their extensive condom program. But heaven forbit we suggest condoms in at least U.S. schools where our religious right insists on sexual ignorance and only unnatural abstinance teaching in schools, or they don't get federal funds.
 

shak

New member
Apr 4, 2004
524
0
0
Dave in Phoenix said:
Shak
And the article further states, " Per-act infectivity in two studies (62,63) was found to be low: 0.0005 and 0.0009 for male-to-female transmission, and 0.0003 and 0.0001 for female-to-male transmission."
If you are going to look at it that way, per act infectivitiy for female-to-male in penile-anal is 0.27% or 0.0027, merely 3 times higher than male-to-female in penile-vaginal and and 9 times higher than female-to-male in penile-vaginal.Nonetheless, I am sure vaginal sex is definately performed ALOT more than anal sex. I am not arguing HIV is hard to get. Although estimated risk per act is low, repeated exposure increases the chance of getting it.

Anyhow, I wasnt trying to say that HIV is spreading thru vaginal intercourse in north america. I was refering to your earlier comment:
In the U.S., Canada and most of the world, HIV never has been much of a risk for heterosexual males or their female partners, as long as the women is sure the male is not bisexual, or a iv drug user, since those are the only real risks for men.
I will again stand by my earlier comment, this is wrong. Every could get HIV regardless of your sexual orientation. Hmm...if you still disagree with me, I seriously dont know how to explain better to you. Maybe you can take that quote to the local health officials and ask them their opinions on it.
 
Last edited:

Dave in Phoenix

Active member
Jul 6, 2002
196
26
28
Phoenix AZ
www.sexworkcanada.com
I said there is "not much" risk, or low risk. I never said zero risk.

But the risk is so low if you are that concerned, you should not drive a car or walk out of your home since your risk of being killed in car crash or lightning is far higher. The statement everyone is at risk is true but creates the huge disinformation and false worry that occrured in the early days of HIV.

The Wall Street Journal had great story "CDC's Deceitful HIV Scare Campaign" exposes how the media and CDC was causing undo worry for hetersexuals by not saying how very low the risk was.

"Rethinking AIDS" Wall Street Journal 3/17/93 Highlights by Mr. Root-Bernstein: There is absolutely no doubt that some people are much more susceptible to AIDS than others. Perhaps the most striking data concern female prostitutes in Western nations. Early in the epidemic, it was assumed that female prostitutes would spread AIDS to the heterosexual community but that clearly is not true.

HIV infected prostitutes, with only a few exceptions, are intravenous drug abusers. Cases of sexually acquired HIV among drug-free prostitutes are almost unknown. In literally only a handful of cases have female prostitutes transmitted HIV to a client, and drug abuse by both the prostitute and the client has been documented in almost all those cases.

Every major review of female prostitution by medical authorities of Western nations has concluded that drug-free female prostitutes are not susceptible to HIV and are not, and will not be, the means of infecting the general population.

An even more striking fact is that, like female prostitutes, hemophiliacs have not become vectors for spreading AIDS into the heterosexual population. Secondary cases of AIDS, in which a person not in a primary risk group acquires AIDS from someone in such a group, constitute only 3% of all AIDS cases ever reported in the U.S. Most all cases of AIDS transmitted by hemophiliacs have documented assaults on their immune systems by other factors in addition to the HIV exposure. Immunologically healthy individuals seem to be almost immune - but it's the few exceptional cases that get all the media attention.

Author Michael Fumento, in his book The Myth of Heterosexual AIDS, offers substantial evidence that non IV drug abuser heterosexuals are in less danger of contracting AIDS thru non-anal, sexual intercourse than they are of dying from shark attacks, being hit by lightning, or accidentally drowning in the bathtub. The book is very well referenced and documented. The book was reviewed by the Journal of the American Medical Assn as "the best single source available to enable heterosexual persons to assess their personal risk."

I have lots more info from the early days of HIV at "The Facts Not Hysteria" at http://www.libchrist.com/std/facts.html

Data since these writings only confirm the very low risk (not zero) of heterosexual HIV transmission, especialy female to male.
 

shak

New member
Apr 4, 2004
524
0
0
Dave in Phoenix said:
I said there is "not much" risk, or low risk. I never said zero risk.

But the risk is so low if you are that concerned, you should not drive a car or walk out of your home since your risk of being killed in car crash or lightning is far higher. The statement everyone is at risk is true but creates the huge disinformation and false worry that occrured in the early days of HIV.
huh?!! so you are saying that the risk of contracting HIV through bareback vaginal sex is lower than driving a car or walk out of my home ? I dont get this. Do you meant to say that if I know one particular SP that does not use injective drugs(i can examine the body and find the marks) then I am safer to go BBFS with her than driving a car?


When intercourse is performed, there are 2 possibility.
A) Your partner is HIV negative.
Your chance of getting HIV is 0 in this case.
B) Your partner is HIV positive.
Depending on the type of sex, as pointed out before the penile-vaginal
has a chance of 0.0003 for female-male transmission per act. 0.0003 may seem low, but suppose you have sex 100 times a year. That's 0.03 or 3%.
I personally am not comfortable with this and I definately have a lower risk walking out of my home.

A special note should be made, the risk group your partner belongs to (ie if she is injected drug user/bi-sexual) doesnt change your risk of contracting HIV. Your risk of getting HIV only depends on your partner's status, not the risk category she belongs to. Because he/she could be HIV negative even if he/she belongs to a high risk group and vice versa. The two variable(estimated risk per act and the risk category your partner belongs to) are independent.
 
Last edited:
Ashley Madison
Vancouver Escorts