"Bigbucks has a medical backgound/MD position. He should know the facts here."
Is that true ? I must have missed that.
Anyway, I can't see anything he said that isn't true, however, it doesn't paint the complete picture.
Anybody THAT interested should visit the CDC's website and read up on it.
I orginally believed that blood to blood contact was required to pass on HIV (for purposes of this post I am ignoring other STD's) . Hence, even for BBFS, unless the guy is unusually large and/or the lady is unusually tight or the intercourse is unusually rough,, there will be NO tearing of either the vaginal walls or the penis, hence, even IF either party is HIV+, there is a reasonably good chance the virus will NOT infect the other party. This was always the main theory as to why HIV was much more prevalent among gays and IV drug users sharing needles. Gay guys often had/have unprotected anal sex wheree tearing of the skin is almost routine. IV drug users sharing needles have the other users blood in the needle and they then shoot up themselves, injecting another person's blood right into their system.
The possibilities, or chance of, spreading HIV via BBBJ, TC, NQNS, whatever, then become more clearly less risky than BBFS. There is seldom any blood to blood contact during this activity. Hence BBBJ is safer than BBFS.
However, I remember reading, a few months or so ago (don't remember where) about the "soft mucosa (sp ?)" of the mouth and/or vaginal area is susceptible to possible "attack"/entry of the HIV virus. This would appear to contradict, or more accurately, expand the "blood to blood" contact theory.
Anybody have any further info on that ?