oral / fingering and STDs (1 Viewer)

[teleopa]

Are there any STD risks with fingering chicks and oral? And how can you reduce these risks?

cheers.

 

[withoutaface]

Oral yes, use a condom or dental dam, fingering no, not unless you have cuts on your fingers.

 

[Serius]

what waf said, but if she is sucking your dick, STD risks are absolutely minimal. Unless she has visible cold sores[ and if she does, why exactly are you paying the homeless to suck your dick?] and even then chances of herpies are pretty low.

 

[confetti-31191]

One in eight people have herpies. Check the stats. That is a really high percentage.
So yes. Protection is a must.

 

[Trev]

Risks:
Performing oral sex: Chlamydia, gonorrhea, herpes, syphilis; Lower risk: HIV, hepatitis B
Receiving oral sex: Chlamydia, gonorrhea, herpes syphilis.

 

[Serius]

One in eight people have herpies. Check the stats. That is a really high percentage.
So yes. Protection is a must.

If you have ever had a cold sore then you have herpies. Its not a big deal, and you can get it from heaps of stuff, not just sex. Alot of the people on here are in school or fresh out of it, so ofcourse you will be filled with missinformation and scare tactics. Basically unless its AIDS, STDs arent that big of a deal, and you wont get AIDS if you are straight and not a junkie or sleeping with people who are junkies.

 

[Triangulum]

Basically unless its AIDS, STDs arent that big of a deal, and you wont get AIDS if you are straight and not a junkie or sleeping with people who are junkies.

Or if you sleep with someone who has AIDS. Who might not be a junkie, but might have slept with someone else who has AIDS. And so on down the line.

Also, there are a few non-HIV STDs that are really nasty, like syphilis. It's not as common as it once was, and damage can be averted if you get in early, but it's pretty unpleasant (especially if you transmit it to your children. Missing pieces of skull, anyone?).

 

[Kwayera]

Basically unless its AIDS, STDs arent that big of a deal, and you wont get AIDS if you are straight and not a junkie or sleeping with people who are junkies.

Adding onto everyone else's comments, I'd like to say you're a moron, and I hope you get AIDS just to teach your idiot self a lesson.

 

[dagwoman]

75% of women who get HIV in Australia get it from a male partner.

EDIT: sorry, in Victoria.

 

[Optophobia]

Basically unless its AIDS, STDs arent that big of a deal, and you wont get AIDS if you are straight and not a junkie or sleeping with people who are junkies.

These 2 statements are the biggest load of crap ever.

 

[Serius]

880 male cases a year
http://aidsaction.org.au/content/hiv_sti_health/stats.php

http://www.healthinfonet.ecu.edu.au...aspects/infectious/hiv_aids/hiv_aids.htm]Male homosexual contact was responsible for 77% of cases in the total population and for 36% in the Indigenous population, and male homosexual contact with injecting drug use for 4% and almost 11% respectively. Injecting drug use without male homosexual contact was responsible for 4% of cases in the total population and for more than 12% in the Indigenous population.

81% of AIDS cases are homosexuals or drug users [or homosexual drug users lol]

Women get AIDS in an unprotected situation alot easier then men.

Thats 167 cases of AIDS in hetrosexual non drug using males a year. You are much more likely to die by someone killing you than you are from AIDS yet we arent allowed to carry guns to protect ourselves from that.

Every STD we are supposed to be scared about is either ridiculously easy to cure, or your chances of getting it are so low that even if you jumped the homeless for a living you wouldnt get it.... well ofcourse with one exception.

The only STD that is rather difficult to cure[impossible to legally cure once you have had it for a few months] and statistically quite common for a female to get is pregnancy. Seen as the OP is a male, he doesnt need to worry about that.
All i am saying is that if you are going to create a scare program into making people use protection, do it because of pregnancy.

 

[nick1048]

unforgiving bunch

 

[circusmind]

Every STD we are supposed to be scared about is either ridiculously easy to cure, or your chances of getting it are so low that even if you jumped the homeless for a living you wouldnt get it.... well ofcourse with one exception.

What about teh herp? Very common, incurable.

 

[ari89]

880 male cases a year
http://aidsaction.org.au/content/hiv_sti_health/stats.php


81% of AIDS cases are homosexuals or drug users [or homosexual drug users lol]

Women get AIDS in an unprotected situation alot easier then men.

Thats 167 cases of AIDS in hetrosexual non drug using males a year. You are much more likely to die by someone killing you than you are from AIDS yet we arent allowed to carry guns to protect ourselves from that.

Every STD we are supposed to be scared about is either ridiculously easy to cure, or your chances of getting it are so low that even if you jumped the homeless for a living you wouldnt get it.... well ofcourse with one exception.

The only STD that is rather difficult to cure[impossible to legally cure once you have had it for a few months] and statistically quite common for a female to get is pregnancy. Seen as the OP is a male, he doesnt need to worry about that.
All i am saying is that if you are going to create a scare program into making people use protection, do it because of pregnancy.

You've got it all wrong - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U219eUIZ7Qo

 

[Serius]

You've got it all wrong - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U219eUIZ7Qo

Yeah thats a great add, but kind of reinforces what i said right? scare tactics, all of it.

If you want to see what you are most likely to die from look here

http://www.nsc.org/lrs/statinfo/odds_dying.jpg

We should put more money into pool safety, suicide depression, pretty much anything you can think of over AIDS. Ban fast food to prevent heart disease[1 in 5] rather than wasting money on AIDS research.

This is a funny website on STD prevention: http://www.viceland.com/issues/v11n4/htdocs/big.php

 

[case88]

880 male cases a year
http://aidsaction.org.au/content/hiv_sti_health/stats.php


81% of AIDS cases are homosexuals or drug users [or homosexual drug users lol]

Women get AIDS in an unprotected situation alot easier then men.

Thats 167 cases of AIDS in hetrosexual non drug using males a year. You are much more likely to die by someone killing you than you are from AIDS yet we arent allowed to carry guns to protect ourselves from that.

We're not allowed to carry guns so freely because more often they're devices of offence rather than defence. There is more gun violence in America [supposedly] because of the easy accessability to guns (watch Bowling for Columbine [although Mike Moore has his own flaws, but that's another issue altogether]).

And, assuming that your statistics about the homosexual population being affected by AIDS are correct, it's still essential to research cures because, just in case you didn't notice, homosexuals are people too. Just 'cos heterosexual people might be (although I'm not sure) less affected by AIDS, doesn't mean that there's no need to research cures any more.

Anyway, since the OP's initial question has been answered already, I guess this is an interesting digression :-S

 

[withoutaface]

We're not allowed to carry guns so freely because more often they're devices of offence rather than defence. There is more gun violence in America [supposedly] because of the easy accessability to guns (watch Bowling for Columbine [although Mike Moore has his own flaws, but that's another issue altogether]).

And, assuming that your statistics about the homosexual population being affected by AIDS are correct, it's still essential to research cures because, just in case you didn't notice, homosexuals are people too. Just 'cos heterosexual people might be (although I'm not sure) less affected by AIDS, doesn't mean that there's no need to research cures any more.

Anyway, since the OP's initial question has been answered already, I guess this is an interesting digression :-S

If correlation equals causation, then explain why Washington DC has about the highest percentage of gun crime in the US despite having very tight gun controls.

 

[case88]

^^ I have no idea. Perhaps they obtain them illegally or in neighbouring states. Perhaps there is such an establishment of crime already that it's hard to eradicate it with restriction laws. I'm not saying that accessability is the ONLY cause of gun violence. I'm just saying that my understanding is that it's one of them. My reply was to the original post about restriction on guns: I personally think that restriction is justified. I don't know how effective it is, but my logic leads me to believe that it must have some effect. If you think that it's completely ineffective, please feel free to elaborate. I'm willing to change my opinion, because that's what it is: opinion. You sound like you have a lot more factual knowledge, so feel free to disagree with me =)

 

[Serius]

We're not allowed to carry guns so freely because more often they're devices of offence rather than defence. There is more gun violence in America [supposedly] because of the easy accessability to guns (watch Bowling for Columbine [although Mike Moore has his own flaws, but that's another issue altogether]).

And, assuming that your statistics about the homosexual population being affected by AIDS are correct, it's still essential to research cures because, just in case you didn't notice, homosexuals are people too. Just 'cos heterosexual people might be (although I'm not sure) less affected by AIDS, doesn't mean that there's no need to research cures any more.

Anyway, since the OP's initial question has been answered already, I guess this is an interesting digression :-S

Actually i would argue its because america is a more violent country rife with crime, but thats beside the point. The basic comparison is we arent allowed to protect ourselves from violent crime.

Of course homosexuals are still people, the OP is iam assuming het, probably white or asian and a male, non drug user... in basically every factor he has the lowest possible odds for getting AIDS. Then he was talking about oral sex [ which even if the girl blowing you has AIDS, u have about a 1/20 000 chance of getting it yourself] we start to see how rediculously low the odds really are.

my comment about how government funds are distributed was not meant to villify homosexuals, but rather point how how so few people have AIDS [less than 1000 a year] and yet the disease commands so much resources. Wouldnt it be better if all that money was spent on something that actually kills lots of people like the big 5 killers heart disease[which 1/5 australians die from], stroke[1/24], cancer[luckily this has a fair bit of funding, but still needs more, 1/7] suicide[1/119] and car accidents[1/84] where as AIDS kills something like a mere 1/20 000

You know more children die from drowning in a pool compared to guns, yet there are so many gun laws designed to safe guard gun deaths, when to save more people all they have to do is introduce pool safety laws, even simple ones like pool fencing and gate laws, adult supervision would save far more childrens lives than anything they could do with gun laws[even banning them outright]

 

[+Po1ntDeXt3r+]

if u have cold sores (HSV-1) u can still get genital warts (HSV-2) both are herpes family viruses.. and u can get both in groin and face nowadays... why not avoid getting it in the first place?
they hurt and they have been shown to increase ure chances of harming a baby if ure carrying these viruses.

HIV/AIDS prevention.. great thing about HIV is that we know how it is spreads very clearly.. but pity is we have no cure for it... the medications cost ridiculous sums of money when u do get it and then it will keep a person alive for 20-30 yrs if they can put up with the side effects.. we have a low prevalance in Australia but the incidence is increasing at a VERY high rate in MSM.... there are laws about spreading HIV now..

but to those that refute gettin HIV thru oral.. i propose that u try it... see if u get that 1 in 20 000 chance.. personally i wouldnt.. cos frankly there is very little research into oral transmission of HIV and no talk of viral load would make me suspect its higher than that....

Pool Safety: how do u prevent drownings even with gates being mandatory.. how does the Govt enforce adult supervision? u ask unrealistic things to be done when children are very curious.. and parents usually dun try to make their kids die intentionally... the equivalent to gun laws for pools.. would be to outlaw pools :| and i dun see that happening soon enough...