Can you catch HIV this way?

Henry Rodriguez39 MemberOP

19 messages
joined Dec 2008

#1 · Dec 31, 2008

I have a question. I met a girl about a month ago. She told me she’s had a few sexual partners in the past and always used protection. She’s likely healthy; we haven't actually had intercourse yet, just making out. But here is what is weighing on me. During one encounter, I was performing manual stimulation on her—if you catch my drift—and I realized I had a small cut on one of my fingers. It wasn't bleeding heavily, just a fresh nick, though because my skin gets so dry in the winter, it hasn't quite healed. I am certain my finger didn't come into direct contact with any fluids, but the irritation is constant and I can't stop wondering about the odds of HIV transmission this way. Does anyone know if this posed a risk? If she were positive—which is unlikely—what are the actual chances of transmission through such contact? Honestly, it's eating at me. I'm considering waiting six months to get tested, but I'd appreciate some insight. Everything I've read online is too vague to be helpful. Thanks. 😢 😢 😢 😢 😕

Christian Richardson9 Member

20 messages
joined Feb 2010

#2 · Dec 31, 2008

you remind me of myself 🤣
look, you’re stressing out over absolutely nothing 😉
if she’s been using condoms up until now, her chances of being infected are honestly pathetic—I mean, even if she occasionally slept with someone without protection, the odds are still basically zero. and even if we're talking about a scenario where she had a bunch of partners and always skipped the condom, the risk of HIV is still negligible because, let's be real, out of all those people, maybe one person—if that—even has it. and even if that one person does have it, the chance of her catching it from them is maybe 10-20% if they were having unprotected sex with everything finishing inside her and all that. seriously, even if we assume the worst and say she did contract HIV, the odds of you picking it up just from touching her through a cut are laughably low—we're talking like 1 in 100,000,000 territory
if you actually did end up getting infected, then hey, I guess that's just how the cards fell and that's just life 😁

don't sweat it, everything is fine 👍

Nicole James Regular

313 messages
joined Dec 2010

#3 · Dec 31, 2008

Henry Rodriguez39 said:So, I have a question for the group. About a month ago, I met this girl—we haven't had full intercourse yet, just kissing and things like that—and she mentioned she’s had a few sexual partners in the past but always used protection. She seems healthy, or at least there's no reason to think otherwise. But here is what's weighing on me. During one of our encounters, I was performing manual stimulation on her—if you catch my drift—and I realized I had a small nick on one of my fingers. It wasn't bleeding heavily, but it was a fresh cut—you know how dry your skin gets in the winter, so it just wouldn't heal properly. I am fairly certain my finger didn't actually make contact with any fluids, but the thought keeps itching at the back of my mind. I can't help but wonder: what are the actual odds of HIV transmission through a scenario like this? If she were positive—which, again, is unlikely—could it happen this way? Honestly, it's really eating at me. I'm thinking about just waiting six months to go get tested, but I wanted to see if anyone here could give me some real clarity. Everything I read online is so vague and unhelpful. Thanks. 😢 😢 😢 😢 😕

The chances are roughly the same as being struck by debris from a falling satellite, surviving without a scratch, and then getting hit by a freight train on your way to the hospital.

Henry Rodriguez39 MemberOP

19 messages
joined Dec 2008

#4 · Dec 31, 2008

So, if bodily fluids actually make contact with the cut, are the odds slim or basically zero that I’ll catch something?? (Again, I’m saying "IF" she has HIV, though she probably doesn't—but you can never truly be certain 🙂 ) HIV is a real nightmare.

restlessmason54 Member

40 messages
joined Jun 2020

#5 · Dec 31, 2008

Just imagine where people would end up if they actually followed your line of reasoning; you might as well try shaking hands with someone who’s HIV positive when you’ve got an open wound yourself, and honestly, it’s just a recipe for disaster
Or think about how much stuff moves through our economy via cash or even just the sheer volume of things passing through public transit systems—it’s wild. Honestly, at this rate, the best move is probably just to lock yourself in the house or maybe book a flight to some remote island somewhere far away from all this🤣

restlessmason54 Member

40 messages
joined Jun 2020

#6 · Dec 31, 2008

Maybe stick to wearing gloves from now on, specifically those heavy-duty work ones 😁

Ronald Cox52 Newcomer

6 messages
joined Mar 2008

#7 · Dec 31, 2008

By the way, you can actually test after 3 months, not 6

The one with the satellite is awesome :-)

stormyheron4 Active Member

86 messages
joined Aug 2009

#8 · Dec 31, 2008

Henry Rodriguez39 said:So, if there was blood and it actually got inside the cut, does that mean my chances of catching something are slim to none? (Again, I’m saying "IF" she has HIV, which she probably doesn't, but you can never be 100% sure 🙂). HIV is such a nightmare.

The odds of getting infected that way are incredibly low. Even with a needle stick from someone positive, the transmission rate for HIV is only about 0.2%.

Henry Rodriguez39 MemberOP

19 messages
joined Dec 2008

#9 · Dec 31, 2008

restlessmason54 said:just imagine where people would end up with an attitude like yours. you might as well shake hands with someone bleeding from an HIV infection when you have an open cut yourself.
or think about cash, or public transit—it's all just vectors for different things. honestly, stay inside or just book a flight to some remote island. 🤣

Look, I’m no medical expert on HIV, but here is what happened: she was wet, 😁 and then my fingers followed. One of them had a small cut. My logic tells me mucus could enter the bloodstream, even if my better judgment says I'm just being paranoid. Still, it's weighing on me.

Kenneth Jackson30 Member

27 messages
joined Feb 2008

#10 · Dec 31, 2008

Henry Rodriguez39 said:Look, I’m certainly no medical expert when it comes to HIV, but from what I can gather—the area was quite lubricated 😁 after she finished and my fingers were involved—and there was a small cut on one of them. My mind started racing, thinking mucus could potentially enter the bloodstream, though my logic tells me I’m probably just overthinking things. Still, it’s definitely weighing on me.

Honestly, I think you should be more worried if things hadn't been well-lubricated in the first place.☕

Henry Rodriguez39 MemberOP

19 messages
joined Dec 2008

#11 · Dec 31, 2008

Based on everything I've gathered, HIV isn't actually transmitted quite as easily as people claim, or am I mistaken?

Jerry Booth10 Member

36 messages
joined May 2008

#12 · Dec 31, 2008

You clearly aren't even slightly worried about this. Honestly, just go out and enjoy yourself somewhere else; go ahead and welcome the New Year in peace without any anxiety, because you don't have even a 0000000000% chance of having contracted HIV.😉

stormyheron4 Active Member

86 messages
joined Aug 2009

#13 · Dec 31, 2008

Henry Rodriguez39 said:So, based on all this, I'm thinking HIV isn't actually that easy to catch, or am I totally off base?

Fear really plays tricks on your eyes. Try looking at these facts again and tell me how much you think HIV actually spreads.

Henry Rodriguez39 MemberOP

19 messages
joined Dec 2008

#14 · Jan 1, 2009

You've provided a bit of encouragement. Thanks.

ruggedpanther64 Member

29 messages
joined Aug 2007

#15 · Jan 1, 2009

HIV is transmitted through just three specific avenues:
Engaging in sexual activity without using the appropriate protection designed for it, like condoms,
Via blood transfusions
Or from a mother to her baby during pregnancy

Any other way is basically an impossible mission

placidjackal36 Active Member

183 messages
joined Jan 2008

#16 · Jan 2, 2009

stormyheron4 said:The odds of catching it that way are slim; if you get stuck by an infected needle, the transmission rate is about 0.2%.

All that means is that out of 100% of total cases, needle sticks account for 0.2% of them.
Don't confuse that with the actual probability of getting HIV if you specifically get poked by an infected needle. There is a massive difference between those two ways of looking at the numbers.

It’s the same logic for the situation mentioned in the original post. Out of everyone living with HIV, the people who caught it via that specific method make up a tiny fraction—my rough estimate, anyway—but that tells you absolutely nothing about your individual risk level if you actually experience what was described.

HIV spreads through sexual contact because friction causes micro-tears in the mucous membranes. It is technically possible to catch it that way, sure, but it's unlikely. If there wasn't intense friction involved (which clearly wasn't the case here) and there isn't active bleeding, the chances are pretty low.
But honestly, screw the statistics if you're losing sleep over it. Just go get tested so you can stop worrying and get some peace of mind.

ruggedpanther64 said:HIV only transmits in three ways:
Sexual contact without using protection like condoms
Blood transfusions
Mother to child during pregnancy

Anything else is basically impossible.

It isn't impossible. Anywhere you have open wounds, the risk spikes because that's where the concentration of viral particles is highest.

Henry Rodriguez39 MemberOP

19 messages
joined Dec 2008

#17 · Jan 2, 2009

placidjackal36 said:That just means that out of 100% of cases, only 0.2% involve transmission via a needle stick from an infected needle.
You aren't addressing the actual probability of contracting HIV if you suffer a needle stick from a contaminated needle. The distinction between those two claims is vital.

The same logic applies to the situation mentioned in the opening post. Out of all those living with HIV, the number of people who contracted it through that specific method represents a mere fraction of a percent—my own estimation, anyway. However, that tells us absolutely nothing about the individual risk if you actually undergo the scenario described.

With sexual contact, HIV spreads because friction causes micro-tears in the mucous membranes. Transmission via the method you described is possible, but unlikely. If there was no intense friction (which clearly wasn't the case here) and the wound isn't bleeding, the odds are slim.
But screw statistics if they won't let you sleep. It's better to just go get tested and clear your head.

It’s not impossible. Anywhere you have open wounds, the risk climbs because that's where the concentration of viral particles is highest.

So there is a risk, but it's minimal? 😕 Look, the wound was almost superficial; it wasn't deep, just wide enough for the needle, maybe 1 cm long. It didn't bleed, but it was somewhat fresh. How can I explain this better: basically, if you pressed a paper towel against it, you might see a barely visible damp trace, or maybe nothing at all—certainly no blood. And I didn't rub her vagina with that finger; I could almost swear there was no contact at all between the vaginal mucus and that cut (and certainly not a significant amount of mucus). Maybe—and that's a big "maybe"—I accidentally rested a damp finger against the wound later on, though that was hours after I had washed my hands 🙄... now, this might sound ridiculous to anyone with medical training, but I am terrified. (These replies gave me a bit of hope, but now I'm "worried" again)

stormyheron4 Active Member

86 messages
joined Aug 2009

#18 · Jan 2, 2009

placidjackal36 said:That just means out of all those cases, only about 0.2% involve transmission from a needle stick with HIV on it.
Don't confuse that with the actual probability of catching HIV if you get stuck by an infected needle. There is a massive difference between those two things.

Out of 1,000 needle sticks from an infected source, you're looking at maybe 2 actual infections.

stormyheron4 Active Member

86 messages
joined Aug 2009

#19 · Jan 2, 2009

Henry Rodriguez39 said:So you're saying there's a risk, but it's basically zero? 😕 Look, listen. That cut was practically surface-level. It wasn't deep at all. We're talking needle-thin and maybe a centimeter long. It didn't even bleed. It was just, how do I put this? If you pressed a paper towel against it, you might see a tiny damp spot, or maybe nothing at all. Definitely no blood. And I wasn't rubbing my finger against her vagina. Honestly, I could swear there was absolutely no contact between any vaginal fluids and that little nick (and certainly not a lot of fluid). Maybe—and that's a big maybe—I accidentally touched the wound later with a finger that was a bit damp after washing my hands 🙄... Now, I know this sounds ridiculous to anyone who actually knows anything about medicine, but I am freaking out here. (The previous comments were meant to reassure me, but now I'm back to being "worried" again)

We haven't even talked about the most important part yet: her status. How certain are you that she could be infected? Are we talking a 1% chance of transmission, or are you 100% sure she's positive?

If she isn't infected, there is no way you can catch anything.

Henry Rodriguez39 MemberOP

19 messages
joined Dec 2008

#20 · Jan 2, 2009

stormyheron4 said:We haven't even touched on her status yet. How certain are you that she could be infected? Are we talking a 1% chance of transmission, or is there 100% certainty that she's positive?

If she isn't carrying anything, how exactly would you catch it?

That’s precisely the point. It is highly probable she doesn't have HIV. As for me being a hypochondriac... what can I say 🙂? Still, one can never truly know. She had four different partners before me. That is what sticks in my mind.

Can you catch HIV this way?

🔗 Similar threads