This was a zero risk event for any STD, for all practical purposes, including all the infections you have listed. Even direct cunnilingus (oral-vaginal sex) is low risk for all STDs, and I'll point out you don't know your partner is infected with any active STD. In any case, fingering and other sorts of hand-genital contact are risk free, even when genital fluids are used as lubricant. And kissing almost never transmits any STD either.

You do not need testing for anything after such an event, nor any change in potential sexual contact with other partners you may have.

I hope these comments are helpful. Let me know if anything isn't clear.

HHH, MD

As I believe I have one more question, I would like to ask you something more general relating to public discussions and understandings of STIs that has always intrigued me. Given that this is your area of expertise, I assume that you must have discussed this with your colleagues before: why is there so much obfuscation, hyperbole and scare-mongering presented online relating to STIs, even on official medical websites? Many sources even appear to ‘stoke the flames’ of anxiety and confusion rather than calming and clarifying. To what end? Why is it so hard to create an extensive online resource offering clear and realistic advice, as opposed to all the theoretical ‘doomsday scenario’ stuff that’s all over the internet?! I’m interested to know your views on this - thanks again for your time.

Your observation is correct. Many reliable sources take conservative stances out of legal concerns -- i.e. if any theoretical risk at all, legal advice may be to not take risks in reassuring people. As a result, many resources don't distinguish the different levels of risk from, say, unprotected vaginal or anal sex compared with oral sex or mutual masturbation. Often there are no dataat all -- for example, no data exist at all on the risk of HIV transmission by fingering, just common sense understanding by experts that there have been no such cases reported plus understanding of the biology involved. But without data, some sites prefer to acknowledge that risk may exist. Some sites are driven by political slants, e.g. conservative or religious philosophies that don't like sayting things that they fear will stoke heated passion, e.g. saying things like "condoms don't always work, so just don't have sex at all." (Of course no safety device works 100% of the time -- people die wearing seatbelts or despite having smoke alarms.) Often older advice is not changed as new data become available, e.g. on HIV test performance. And many other influences as well -- there's no single answer. And even these just scratch the surface.

The only advice I can give is to limit online searching about medical issues, stick mostly with professionally run or moderated sites; avoid those run by interest groups of any kind, or at least interpret their perspectives with care. For STDs and HIV, you'll not usually be led astray by CDC (www.cdc.gov/std), the American Sexual Health Association (www.ashasexualhealth.org), and a few others -- including this forum!

That concludes the two follow-up questions and replies included with each thread and so concludes this one. Best wishes and stay safe!