[Question #11162] Sex toy
16 months ago
|
Sorry for returning to the forum. My question may be obvious and repetitive, but I think Dr. Hook may have overlooked my last reply. I apologize if this goes against the forum policy, and I will not return to the forum after this time.
I would like to clarify that when describing my experience, I used the word "anus" instead of "rectum," although I actually meant the latter. Let's assume she inserted the dildo into her vagina and rectum immediately before inserting it into my rectum.
So, even if the sex worker used the dildo on herself (inside her vagina and rectum) immediately before inserting it into my rectum, can I still be confident that my risk of contracting HIV from the dildo's insertion into my rectum is low enough for me to move on with my life without undergoing HIV testing?
I'm not a native English speaker, so I am totally relying on ChatGPT for translation. I hope you understand my description. If anything is unclear, please let me know.
Thank you so much for your help.
![]() |
H. Hunter Handsfield, MD
16 months ago
|
I'm sorry you felt the need to return. I reviewed your recent discussion with Dr. Hook and agree with all he said.
Perhaps it's a language issue and your use of ChatGPT. In English there is no intended difference in exposure to rectum or anus in contaminating an object with viruses or bacteria, including HIV. It isn't possible to enter the rectum without passing through the anus; and almost all sex involving anal penetration includes the rectum. Therefore Dr. Hook did not see a need to respond to the your last question. It makes no difference in the risk of HIV.
Dr. Hook wrote "Theoretically there may be some small risk..." when a dildo goes directly from an infected person's rectum (or anus) into another person's rectum (or anus) "...but in reality [the risk] is very, very low...." Your closing statement repeated that information: you wrote "...even if the sex worker used the dildo on herself (inside her vagina and rectum [or anus] immediately before inserting it into my rectum [or anus], I can still be confident that my risk of contracting HIV...is low enough for me to move on with my life without undergoing HIV testing."
I agree with all that. On the other hand, many anxious persons decide to be tested for HIV even when the risk is zero. Sometimes a worried person is more reassured by a negative test than by professional opinion, no matter how expert. It's up to you. (This does NOT mean that I believe there is any significant risk or that you would test positive. I am sure you would not.)
I hope these comments clarify the situation for you. Best wishes.
HHH, MD
---
16 months ago
|
Thank you for your reply. This clears up my confusion.
I have a history of profound anxiety related to HIV testing, which means I have worried about the accuracy of tests, window periods, etc., in the past. Therefore, if you think my risk is low enough that testing is not necessary, I will just ignore this event and not test for HIV.
Do you agree with my decision?
![]() |
H. Hunter Handsfield, MD
16 months ago
|
Yes, I agree entirely. I'm glad to have been of help.---