Advertisement
The Body: The Complete HIV/AIDS Resource
Follow Us Follow Us on Facebook Follow Us on Twitter Download Our App
Professionals >> Visit The Body PROThe Body en Espanol

HIV Life >> Gay Men

Pages: 1
alheff13
Newbie

Reged: 01/06/08
Posts: 1
hiv tranmission questions
      #234978 - 01/06/08 02:17 PM

ok so i had unprotected sex with a guy twice in one night. the first time we didnt use a condom and i didnt cum in him or precum, he didnt bleed or anything, but i pulled out after a minute or two. then we had sex again but this time we used a condom, the condom didnt break...so my question is what is the likely chance of my getting HIV or anything else?

Post Extras: Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
pozartistsd
Expert

Reged: 01/04/08
Posts: 105
Loc: San Diego, CA
Re: hiv tranmission questions new
      #235020 - 01/08/08 03:34 PM

I've read it's less likely to become infected if you are the "inserter" which you were. To ease your mind and for general health benefits you should get tested in about 6 months. I heard it takes up to 6 months for a positive result to show up if you are infected. You can take one of those rapid-results tests where they swab your mouth and give you the results in about 20 minutes. not sure if they are accurate right away (right after becoming infected). good luck and looks like you have the right idea now to use condoms all the time - they protect against lots of things besides HIV!

Post Extras: Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
oldwoman
Guardian

Reged: 05/12/07
Posts: 435
Loc: Phila,Pa
Re: hiv tranmission questions new
      #235025 - 01/08/08 07:23 PM

It takes 3-6 months to develop the antibodies that you're tested for.Pulling out will not prevent HIV or any other STD's.It doesn't work to prevent pregnancy either.

Post Extras: Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
nomoreworry4me
Master

Reged: 12/24/07
Posts: 127
Re: hiv tranmission questions new
      #235108 - 01/10/08 06:21 PM

UK Soldiers May Have Been Exposed to Contaminated Blood

January 10, 2008

Eighteen British military casualties in Iraq and Afghanistan may have received unscreened blood transfused during their medical emergency, the Sun newspaper has reported. Due to the soldiers' urgent need, the blood was supplied by the United States instead of Britain. After the Pentagon cautioned that some batches of blood used were not properly screened, British military officials located the soldiers and instructed them to be tested for blood-borne diseases such as HIV and hepatitis.

"Where time is of the essence, it can be clinically essential to use American or other coalition medical facilities and their blood or blood products if they can be made available sooner," the Ministry of Defense told the Sun.

"The defense secretary acted quickly to ensure that those British personnel involved were informed as soon as possible," said Defense Minister Derek Twigg. "The actual risk of any infection is low; however, we are taking it extremely seriously," he said. "We are working with the appropriate health authorities to do all that we can to test and reassure the people involved. We… will continue to do all that we can do to support them and their families through this uncertain time."

Back to other news for January 2008

Search the Newsroom archive



Post Extras: Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Pages: 1


What's New at TheBody.com

Additional Information
0 registered and 1 anonymous users are browsing this forum.

Moderator:  TheBody, bogart, crabman, riverprincess 

Permissions
      You cannot start new topics
      You cannot reply to topics
      HTML is enabled
      UBBCode is enabled

Thread views: 4609

 
Jump to

Contact Us | Privacy Statement The Body

*
UBB.threads™ 6.2.3