Deep Kissing and BBBJs

[Guest]

Hmmmm I brought mononeucleosis back from Africa in the '80

 

 

 

So it was [color:blue]youcolor=blue>! You bastard, you've doomed us all.

 

 

 

Also, back in 1983 is was very seldom to find infected people, nowaydays about 8 % carry it........scary......

 

 

 

I'm not sure we're talking about the same thing. Mononucleosis is very common (not common to have, but common to have had). It is not a particularly scary disease either. It is highly contagious during the incubation period and while it can be temporarily debilitating it is not really that dangerous (not more dangerous than most childhood diseases, e.g.). And people don't typically "carry" it, in the sense that it is infectious for the rest of their lives. They do carry the anti-bodies, however.

 

 

 

If you have more info that contradicts my impressions, please let me know.

[Guest]

There are different levels of risk for HIV. For instance, the highest risk of all is recipient anal sex. Receiving a BJ is just about the lowest risk. No one to my knowledge has ever acquired HIV through kissing.

 

 

 

These are relative risks that every intelligent sexually active person should already know and they don't really answer my question. The stats for HIV would indicate that it is very unlikely you will get HIV from either deep kissing or BBBJ, so there is no significantly increased risk. Supporting my hypothesis.

 

 

 

However, this does not address the more mundane STDs (even mono). For all diseases that I know of, assuming it is in your partner's mouth you are just as likely (sometimes more) to get it into your system by your mouth than your penis.

 

 

 

An interesting observation is that in the gay community in the U.S., gay males were hit hard, while lesbians were relatively left untouched (relatively, mind you). This led to the rejoinder against the fire-and-brimstone Christians of, "Well, if God hates gays, he must hate only the male ones."

 

 

 

Duh. God is a man after all, so he must enjoy watching lesbian sex too. But sex between men is just "icky"

 

 

 

There does appear to be some sort of inhibitive substance in saliva that accounts for the lower rate of transmission for oral sex.

 

 

 

I don't know if you followed the link I posted a few weeks ago about how some lubes actually help fight HIV (because they are similar to saliva, presumably). So for any who already choose bareback vaginal or anal sex, at least use one of these lubes to improve your odds slightly.

 

 

 

I remember that giving oral sex to a women is a lower danger risk than giving oral sex to a man

 

 

 

I don't know why this would be (unless you assume that more men have HIV than women). It would seem that unless you are swallowing, the amount of fluid containing HIV would be greater from a woman than a man, so it would be safer on a man. The difference may be less with an uncircumsized man (i.e. oral sex on an uncircumsized man is more dangerous, comparable to that on a woman).

[Guest]

Looking back at my original post, I think I created a bit of ambiguity so i shall attempt to ameliorate any possible misunderstanding. Last trip I come home with mono presumably caused from kissing BGs as I no longer engage in going the growl. BUT the trip before that I caught a bacterial throat infection from eating snatch. No wonder sex tourists have a reputation for being disease carrying barbarians with the medical community in the west (and probably everywhere else) with hooligans like me lurking about. I wonder what GOD will strike me down with on my next adventure. I don't think anything could cause more embassament to a returning "holidaymaker" than presenting himself at customs/quarantine in his home country and indeed back at work with a face full of cold sores. Just like having your guilt written all over your face.

[Lusty]

A trip to Los without munching the fur burger.This is unthinkable!

[Guest]

Actually, it is surprising the number of people who don't have any clue what cold sores are or how you might get them (i'm assuming you're talking about some form of herpes). I guess that's part of the reason cold sores have spread so widely.

 

 

 

So mostly the only people who are going to surmise what you've been up to are those who are sexually promiscuous themselves or in the medical profession.

[Guest]

FD,

 

I would have thought that the cause and effect would be common knowledge. Even when i was at school anyone presenting themselves with an outbreak of cold sores was hounded with "hey you got herpes".

 

 

 

I would guess though that most would not know that chicken pox and shingles was herpes as well.

 

 

 

But then again, you are right ....most people don't seem to know which is a worry.

[Guest]

BB,

 

 

 

"na na na na" is a childish retort ....just me being silly.

[Guest]

Members,

 

Just read a rather shocking thread from another forum, there is a person who admits he is HIV positive out their in Bangkok, indulging. He admitts to going to Baron's and MPs (who knows where else), having BBBJ, getting rimmed, etc.. He actually mentioned names of the girls he did. But the most concern I have, this dude doesn't care and is never going to stop........

[Guest]

9 million adult visiters to LOS per year. I hope you don't think this guy is alone. More than just him have HIV, and know about it. Look at 'patient zero'...the canadian flight attendant that is believed to have brought aids to the western world. He was told what he had, and refused to stop infecting people. There was no law back then for officials to use to stop him. I think a lot of people who become infected become bitter at their death sentence, and take that out on the group whom they suspect cut their life short. I remember a post here saying that an infected B/G said she was going to infect as many punters as she could. Misery loves company, I guess.

 

 

 

So....like I've said before. They are out there, and eventually you will be intimate with one. Just treat every girl you're with as though she were infected, and you should be alright.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest]

risk is a very emotive subject and one in which the vast majority of people throw logic completely out of the window

 

 

 

- i guess this is because very few people are trained to think in a purely objective logical manner

 

 

 

- attitudes to particular risks are governed more by cultural/societal values rather than a logical consideration of mathematical probabilities (which would make more sense)

 

 

 

- take for example cigarette smoking, large population based longitudinal studies in the UK have demonstrated that smokers have a 50% likelihood of dying from smoking related illness

 

 

 

- ie half of all smokers will die partly because of smoking (and many many many more will suffer from non-fatal smoking related disease)

 

 

 

- ie could run similar examples using the eating of unhealthy fast foods, drinking alcohol or jaywalking

 

 

 

- if sayjann had admitted in a post that he smoked cigarettes instead of going bareback - would he be flamed? unlikely.

 

 

 

- You might argue that a smokers risk taking does not affect others the way a barebacker might by spreading disease - again , this is an illogical comparison (the smoker affects others via the effects of passive smoking, the opportunity costs of healthcare and the psychosocial damage of loved ones)

 

 

 

- drug taking is another good example, if sayjann admitted to ecstasy use he may well get flamed or at least invoke negative attitudes

 

 

 

- but what if he admitted to enjoying skiing holidays? - over 3 times as many English people die skiing each year than die of Ecstacy related causes (and there are many many more ecsatcy users than there are skiiers)

 

 

 

- back to barebacking - i'd never condone it and never plan to do it - but there have been times that i have against my better judgement - most often when alcohol and a very sexy girls are in the picture - as you mention i performed a brief calculation during my old trip report - i've cut/pasted the releveant bit:

 

 

 

"Oh well, I rationalise that my chance of HIV infection is miniscule viz. the chance of her being HIV +ve is 30% (pessimistic figure), the chance of HIV transmission from an infected female to a male via a single act of vaginal intercourse (of which we indulged in 3 unprotected acts) is generally estimated at 0.01-0.001%, being circumcised my chance of catching HIV is 30% that of a foreskinned punter

 

Which equates to 0.3 x 3 x 0.001 x 0.3 = 0.00027% ie roughly a 1 in 3700 (or 1 in 370 risk if using the more pessimistic 0.01% transmission rate) chance of picking up HIV.

 

 

 

I decide I can live with this figure - no regrets (too late now anyway so no point dwelling on it)"

 

 

 

- i stand by these calculations as they are accurate - the only figure that would be questioned is the transmission risk associated with a single encounter with HIV positive person.

 

 

 

-I quote a 0.01-0.001% risk - this figure was given to me by an acquaintance who is an international ascientific uthority on HIV and is as accurate as the current state of knowledge permits

 

 

 

- back to sayjanns quote of 2 bareback shags each trip - this equates to an overall risk of HIV transmission of

 

1 in 185 to 1 in 1850 per trip

 

 

 

- thats using the very pessimistic (and highly unlikely) figure of 30% of BG's being positive. In reality the % of BGs positive is likely to be much lower and hence the resulting risks significantly lower

 

 

 

- the absolute risk is real but it is small - yet so emotive.

 

 

 

- Consider the risks of other activities in LOS - getting on the back of a motorcycle taxi for example - don't know what the risk is there but i certainly wouldn't get on one unless i had too

 

 

 

- however if Sayjann were allowed to shag all 127 girls bareback then the risk would shoot up to between 1 in 3 to 1 in 27 per trip

 

 

 

- it wouldn't take many trips at that rate to have a high likelihood of catchin HIV then

 

 

 

Although I personally would not choose to go bareback, IMO if Sayjann wants to go bareback and the girls are willing (and understand the risks) then its up to him. Flaming him is just stupid.

 

 

 

of course, the issue of whether the girls do understand the risks is a whole different issue