[Question #1530] Married Mistake
97 months ago
|
![]() |
Edward W. Hook M.D.
97 months ago
|
Welcome to our Forum. I'll be glad to comment. The exposure you describe was very low risk. Most people do not have STIs of any sort (including HIV) and your partner sounds to be lower risk than average. Even in high risk populations, oral STIs are rare, gonorrhea being probably the most common and that is present in less than 5% of persons attending STD clinics (who, I would think are at somewhat higher risk than your partner). Even if your partner did have an STI, most exposures do not lead to infection.
From the sounds of things you received but did not give oral sex. If this is the case, oral sex only relatively rarely leads to infection. When it does, the most common problems are either symptomatic (causing burning on urination or penile discharge) gonorrhea of non-gonococcal urethritis NGU) caused by mouth organisms introduced in to the urethra during sex. This sort of non-chlamydial NGU is not clearly and STI in the traditional sense, is not readily transmitted to sex partners like other STIs, and in not associated with complications. In the Unitized Kingdom, many specialists do not treat NGU associated with oral sex. When treated, oral sex-related NGU typically resolves quickly.
As for your symptoms, the symptoms you describe are more characteristic of the sensations an anxious person might experience if they were on the "lookout" for possible STI symptoms than true STI symptoms. They do not suggest STI. Similarly your wife's symptoms are not suggestive of STI either.
If I were you, I would not worry in the least and I see no need for testing related to the exposure you describe unless you want the peace of mind that a negative test would should. If you decide to test, testing for gonorrhea and NGU would be most important. no need for syphilis or herpes testing unless you develop sores on your penis. there are no cases of HIV ever proven to be acquired through receipt of oral sex so there is no need for HIV testing at all
I hope my comments are helpful and reassuring. EWH
97 months ago
|
![]() |
Edward W. Hook M.D.
97 months ago
|
---
97 months ago
|
![]() |
Edward W. Hook M.D.
97 months ago
|
Thanks for your confidence in my recommendations, I appreciate it.
Syphilis lesions may take up to three weeks, on average, to appear. Your chance of getting syphilis from the exposure you describe is very, very low. As for herpes, lesions would appear at about 4-7 days after exposure and almost never after 10 days.
I agree completely, you are out of the woods. I really see no reason for testing of any sort and would suggest that you move forward from here without concern.
Our Forum guidelines call for up to three responses per question. This is my third response. As a result there will be no further replies to this thread. Take care. EWH