[Question #385] Unprotected Oral Sex and Risk
107 months ago
|
107 months ago
|
107 months ago
|
Edward W. Hook M.D.
107 months ago
|
Welcome to our Forum. You were cut off from continuing your post when you exceeded the word limit described in the guidelines for access to and use of this forum.
I will try to help by persuading you that the symptoms you have described and almost certainly not due to any STI. The sexual exposure you describe, receipt of oral sex is very low risk when compared to vaginal or rectal sexual exposure. Oral STIs are uncommon (even among partners who may have many other partners) and even when present, in comparison to other sites of infection, are not efficiently transmitted from person to person. In addition to these facts, you have the evidence provided to you based on negative tests on two occasions when the results will be reliable and the opinion of two other trained health professionals who found no reason to worry about STIs. To that evidence I will add a few more comments..
The symptoms you describe- an "icey hot" penile sensation is not a typical description of any STI. Similarly, a dermatologist has inspected your rash and indicated that the rash that is present is not suggestive of an STI.
In answer to your specific questions:
1. there is no need for additional testing for NGU. Between the chlamydia test you have already had (chlamydia is nto most common proven cause of NGU) and the negative tests for a UTI, this possibility can be excluded.
2. No, there is no need for further herpes testing. You did not have an outbreak and by now the vast majority, approaching 90% of persons who acquired herpes would have a positive antibody test by this time.
3. No, syphilis tests would have been positive by this time. the "great imitator is diagnosed in persons who it is not expected by the sorts of tests you have already had.
4. I agree with the doctor who told you that it is time to put your concerns about STIs behind you. The exposure was very low risk and your testing and clinical evaluations since that time prove that you did not get an STI. Further testing would be a waste of time and money. EWH
107 months ago
|
Edward W. Hook M.D.
107 months ago
|
---
107 months ago
|
107 months ago
|
Edward W. Hook M.D.
107 months ago
|
---
107 months ago
|
Edward W. Hook M.D.
107 months ago
|
You have now exceeded the number or replies specified for our site. The "slight burning" on ejaculation with masturbation does not suggest and STI. It does however suggest hyper vigilance on your part.
This will end this thread. EWH