BBFS w/a young hottie

#41
All of these stats are useless unless...

... someone on the board caught something this way. I don't understand the bickering, it's fucking risky, that's it. Wondering if anyone has heard about the new strain of gonorrhea that is pretty much resistant to any drug. It's in Asia, Japan, Hong Kong, China and south east Asia. Much easier to catch that shit with BBBJ let alone BBFS. Ironically the name is the HO41 strain, that's one HO that's is not for this one.
 
#42
... someone on the board caught something this way. I don't understand the bickering, it's fucking risky, that's it. Wondering if anyone has heard about the new strain of gonorrhea that is pretty much resistant to any drug. It's in Asia, Japan, Hong Kong, China and south east Asia. Much easier to catch that shit with BBBJ let alone BBFS. Ironically the name is the HO41 strain, that's one HO that's is not for this one.
Yeah, I saw the other day. Yet another antibiotic resistant bug. TB, MRSA, necrotizing fasciitis... the list is pretty long.
 
#48
I think you might be the one who needs a class in reading comprehension. I never said either of the numbers that you are claiming. I was very specifically referring to the numbers on "insertive penile-vaginal intercourse" for sex, and "Man being fellated" when referring to oral sex. I said.
You're right on that point. I confused the comment directly above your posting with your post, so I apologize for that.

However, you were wrong (or at least very misleading) when you wrote, "Anyone want to take a stab at the difference in risk of HIV transmission between BBFS and BBBJ? it's .045%."

There are standard formulas for calculating differences between two risks. "Relative risk" is calculated as: risk in group 1 / risk in group 2. In the case of oral vs. vaginal sex, this would be: .05 / .005 = 10, meaning that BBFS is 10 times as risky as BBBJ.

There is also a formula for "percent increased risk" between risk 1 and risk 2. The formula for percent risk is: (risk in group 1 - risk in group 2) divided by (risk in group 2), times 100%. In the case of oral vs. vaginal sex, therefore, the formula would be: (.05 - .005) / .05 * 100% = 90%.

https://onlinecourses.science.psu.edu/stat200/node/76

When comparing two risks, you don't simply subtract one from the other. This is because the risk of an action is related to other factors, such as number of times people engage in that action. If the risk of getting HIV from unprotected sex was really only 1/10,000, none of us would worry about that risk at all. However, the risk is actually quite a bit higher than that, because most of us engage in sex more than once in our lifetime. Your comparison is therefore misleading. You made it sound like the difference in risk between oral vs. vaginal sex is miniscule, and it's not miniscule at all. Vaginal sex carries ten times the risk of oral sex.
 
#49
You had me wondering though

from http://www.medhelp.org/posts/STDs/Unprotected-Cunnilingus/show/246446

To (the authors) knowledge, there has never been a reported case of HIV in which the only exposure that the infected person reported was performance of cunnilingus on a woman known or suspected to have HIV.
I appreciate the discussion of the statistics, as it is important to bear in mind. As the author of the link notes, most guys continue with something else after eating a girl out, so it might be so easy to get accurate numbers. Also, I am sure that if something odd happens, such as biting oneself on the tongue, or maybe an active cold sore in the mouth, then the numbers would be different.

I really think that after a point, this line of thinking can only end in madness.
 

Waterclone

Go ahead. Try me.
#50
There are standard formulas for calculating differences between two risks. "Relative risk" is calculated as: risk in group 1 / risk in group 2. In the case of oral vs. vaginal sex, this would be: .05 / .005 = 10, meaning that BBFS is 10 times as risky as BBBJ.
I am aware that it's 10x, but as I said in my earlier posts, that relative relationship is meaningless without the big picture and I believe that it is more misleading than the .045% increase.

If the odds of something are 10%, than a 10x increase means 100%. In that case 10x means everything.

If the odds are 5% then the 10x increase is 50%. It no longer means everything, but the 10x increase is still a big deal. Most people would happily bet a large amount of money as a 95% favorite, but wouldn't even think of it on a coin toss.

In this case, the 10x increase brings you from .005% up to .05%. That's like trying to correctly guess a number from 1 to 20,000. While having 10 guesses is 10x better than having 1 guess, the odds are still extremely small.

Telling someone that something is 10x more dangerous sounds scary but conveys no actual information. It could be an increase from 10% to 100%, or an increase from 5% to 50% or an increase from .005% to .05%.

By telling someone that the risk increases by .045% conveys a lot more information.

Anyway, you have made your point. And I have made mine. I don't think either of us is going to convince the other one, so I suggest we leave it alone and let people reading the thread make their own decisions.
 
#52
I really havent seen any males other than Tommy Morrison or Magic even claim to have gotten HIV from Hetero in the US and both are likely liars and steroid users.

At any rate at my age and the improvements in Meds i will risk a BBBJ but not FS. I likely wont be around too much longer anyway- im gonna enjoy what i can. In all seriousness i would rather JO than get a CBJ.
 
Last edited:
#53
I really havent seen any males other than Tommy Morrison or Magic even claim to have gotten HIV from Hetero in the US and both are likely liars and steroid users.

At any rate at my age and the improvements in Meds i will risk a BBBJ but not FS. I likely wont be around too much longer anyway- im gonna enjoy what i can. In all seriousness i would rather JO than get a CBJ.
I dont know about that... a good cbj... coupled with some hard sex and a trip to Greece then take the cap off and bust in her face. If a bbbj isn't available of course.
 
Last edited:
#54
I dont know about that... a good cbj... coupled with some hard sex and a trip to Greece then take the cap off and bust in her face. If a bbbj isn't available of course.
I hear ya- I know im in the minority on that and by JO - i mean with my tongue up her ass or similar-not sit home and JO.
 
#55
Not worth the risk

Every time you have bbfs with a ho, you are having bbfs with every filthy drug infested slimebag that she's had bbfs with previously. Not worth the risk. IMHO, if you really want bbfs try to pick up a nonpro.
 
#57
... someone on the board caught something this way. I don't understand the bickering, it's fucking risky, that's it. Wondering if anyone has heard about the new strain of gonorrhea that is pretty much resistant to any drug. It's in Asia, Japan, Hong Kong, China and south east Asia. Much easier to catch that shit with BBBJ let alone BBFS. Ironically the name is the HO41 strain, that's one HO that's is not for this one.
caught me genital warts that way was barebacking a couple girls so shit do happen
 

Waterclone

Go ahead. Try me.
#60
If you have bbfs with a nonpro that is a casual pick-up, you run the risk ( a small risk but not zero ) that she has been given hiv, is mad at the world, and wants to pass it on to as many guys that she can.
Um. You also run the risk that she'll stab you with a spoon.

Let's stick to the much more likely scare scenario that she has something and doesn't know it.
 
Top