[Question #6600] Unprotected sex for 3 seconds
66 months ago
|
66 months ago
|
66 months ago
|
![]() |
Edward W. Hook M.D.
66 months ago
|
Welcome back to the Forum although I must say I'm disappointed that you found the need. I cannot help but wonder if this series of questions is related to the questions you asked yesterday. On some occasions our clients misrepresent the nature of their exposures and the origins of their concerns. This is turn hinders our ability to provide useful answers.
In addition, these questions have been already answered. As I told you 24 hours ago, mutual masturbation is a NO RISK event. The interval between genital secretions leaving a partner's body and contact with another person are totally irrelevant. Similarly, the quantity of secretions which you might have come into contact with - small, medium or large- is irrelevant to risk- it is still a no risk event. No one has EVER been infected through exposure to infected genital secretions occurring in the context of mutual masturbation.
In response to your additional questions:
66 months ago
|
![]() |
Edward W. Hook M.D.
66 months ago
|
READ THIS REPLY VERY QUICKLY. IF YOU STILL HAVE QUESTIONS, PLEASE RETURN TO YOUR EQARLIER POST!
1. Your follow-up is repetitive and you are going down the same "rabbit hole' you were in yesterday. AS I SAID BEFORE, HIV becomes non-infectious upon exposure to the environment outside of the body. The environment has many characteristics including temperature, lower humidity, indirect contact, etc. this is the only answer I am going to provide. If you repeat the question, the thread will be closed. Further, if I close the thread again because of these sorts on inconsequential, repetitive, anxiety-driven questions, future questions may be administratively closed without a reply and without return of your posting fee.
2. Repetitive again. Already answered. NO! No one has ever been infected through the sort of contact with genital secretions on an inanimate object of the sort you describe. Not ever. You will not be the first.
3. Repetitive, already answered. Please review our previous interaction.
EWH
66 months ago
|
![]() |
Edward W. Hook M.D.
66 months ago
|
The observation is based on observations of thousand, if not millions of patients who have had millions of cases.
In fact, I suppose it is theoretically possible that you will be struck by a meteorite falling from the sky while reading my reply HOWEVER it is most unlikely to occur. Based on the observations of thousands of highly trained scientists who have studied thousands and thousand of cases however it has NEVER been observed and thus, if anything is less likely to occur that you are to be struck by a falling meteor. Put another way, there is no plausibility to the concerns you have expressed.
this is my final reply to this series of questions. You have been worried that further repetitive questions may be closed without a response. I hope that the information I have provided will be helpful to you and allow you to move forward from what appears to be an irrational and unfounded fear. Please do not continue to worry. End of thread. EWH
66 months ago
|
66 months ago
|
66 months ago
|
66 months ago
|
![]() |
Edward W. Hook M.D.
66 months ago
|
Final reply. While it may be theoretically possible for a person to become infected in the manner you describe, the observation by highly trained scientists is that persons do not become infected with HIV in this way is based on observations of thousands, if not millions of patients who have had millions of exposures of this sort.. I provided an analogy regarding being struck by a meteorite from space. Your risk for getting HIV from the exposure you describe is lower than your risk of being struck by a meteor.
This thread is over. EWH