|transmission question never got answer
Dec 17, 2003
I know oral sex is an extremely low risk, but what about with full ejaculation? Does you think a test is warranted?
I also wanted to say that I am surprised that a smart man like yourself is actually a democrat.
| Response from Dr. Frascino
You "know oral sex is an extremely low risk . . . . " OK good. But you are wondering about a "full ejaculation?" That would be as opposed to a "partial ejaculation" perhaps? My dear Republican, when most people refer to "sex," they include the ejaculation. Consequently with "no," "partial," or "full" ejaculation, the risk of HIV transmission remains extremely low. Yes, it's even lower if there's no ejaculation, and even lower still if there's no sex at all. OK?
Should you be HIV tested? Only you can decide that. If you do get tested, remember to wait at least three months.
Finally, I'm not smart because I'm a Democrat. I'm a Democrat because I'm smart. And considering the syntax and grammar of your question "Does you think a test is warranted" I'd have to assume either (1) English is not your first language or (2) you're a Republican.
Either way, say well. Consider becoming a Democrat. We enjoy full ejaculation with our sex.
Get Email Notifications When This Forum Updates or Subscribe With RSS
This forum is designed for educational purposes only, and experts are not rendering medical, mental health, legal or other professional advice or services. If you have or suspect you may have a medical, mental health, legal or other problem that requires advice, consult your own caregiver, attorney or other qualified professional.
Experts appearing on this page are independent and are solely responsible for editing and fact-checking their material. Neither TheBody.com nor any advertiser is the publisher or speaker of posted visitors' questions or the experts' material.