I have reviewed several past questions regarding risk from very brief oral contact (i.e. 5 seconds or less, just head of penis) and have seen some different replies and was looking for a little more clarity on the subject.  In question 5246 it seems clear there is incredibly low risk from this sort of incidental contact and no need for testing.  Some other replies suggest testing.  I understand in science you can't call it zero risk.  So, is there anything to be concerned about here?  Estimated odds? Thank you for your help

Welcome back to the Forum.  I'll be glad to comment.  Our perspective on HIV risk related to oral sex has not changed meaningfully since we interacted about 4 years ago.  As you point out, in science one can never say never as new information accrues virtually every day.  OTOH, the amount of data supporting current estimates is huge and thus those estimates are reliable.  Thus, in part, the variation in estimates you see reflects the philosophy that is represented by those providing answers.  For instance, the CDC provides estimates which must be useful for just about anyone who visits one of their websites as well as what appears to be an cautious organization perspective reflecting the desire to never be wrong.  In contrast, on this forum, we try to provide somewhat individualized estimates and advice.  Our advice regarding testing often reflects our sense of our clients' levels of concern.---

My apologies,  the question was regarding gonorrhea and not HIV

Much of what has been said above regarding variation in risks for HIV from giving and receiving oral sex is pertinent for gonorrhea as well.  While most people are not infected, gonorrhea is far more common than HIV, as well as substantially more infectious.  Most (~90%) of gonorrhea acquired from receipt of oral sex will be symptomatic within a few days of exposure while oral gonorrhea acquired from performing oral sex on an infected partner is typically asymptomatic and best detected through testing as described in my original reply.   Most exposures (giving or receiving oral sex) from an infected partner does not lead to infection in the majority of cases (precise estimates of risk are unavailable) but likely occurs in less than 10% of exposures.   Variables such as the numbers of exposures, duration, etc. once again impact risk.  Condoms' are virtually 100% protective if used throughout the exposure.---

Thank you for the response and it kind of gets me there.  As mentioned this is in the event of a few seconds exposure.  Dr Handsfields reply to #5246 included "don't worry about it and don't get tested" and "you were not at risk".  These are pretty comforting responses coming from pros like either of you!  I guess I'm just trying to confirm that is the case in superficial contact.  Again understanding that in science you cant say absolute.  I have read here before the meteorite or lightning analogy in these circumstances.  Also, I understand that symptoms typically occur 3-5 days from exposure?  Thanks again for your help.

Not sure if you are talking about receiving or performing oral sex.  In terms of either however, brief, superficial contact would be quite low risk.  If you want to describe a specific encounter I'll be happy to provide one more response although the thread should technically be closed at this time.  EWH---

Massage happy ending however at some point and I am doubtful anything happened but the therapists head was down near my penis while she was masturbating.  I didn't see anything happen beyond masturbatuin but got concerned "what if" her mouth briefly touched, licked or lips went around the head of penis.   If that even did happen it would have been brief seconds.  I know, anxiety and highly unlikely but thats why I am trying to quantify the risk here.

From what you describe the risk for the experience you describe is virtually zero.  Possible very brief contact only,.  Further licking is a far lower risk  than if your penis had been taken entirely into her mouth.  Given these details I would not be concerned at all and see no need for testing---