The existence of pharyngeal Chlamydia, Gonorrhea, HPV and Herpes infections is well documented. Essential the only way you can get these pharyngeal STD infections is by oral sex. As the receptive partner you are at a much greater risk than your insertive oral sex partner. Since these STD mainly colonized the pharynx as opposed to the oral cavity the risk to the insertive partner may be greater for more penetrating oral sex (DT). Oral Gonorrhea, Chlamydia, HPV and Herpes are considerable under-diagnosed compare the diagnosis of theses infection in anus and genitals. These STD infections which are nearly always asymptomatic are not normally screened for or part of typical ordered STD panel. One reason is they rarely present a real health threat compared to the same infection of the genitals other than present a reservoir for future infections. Also those individuals orally infected are more likely to have the infection in the genital than vise-versa. Screening and treating genital infections of the treatable STDs with systemic antibiotic therapy will also eradicate many oral infections that also exist.
HIV on the other hand is a systemic infection and does not localize at the site of infection. Transmission of HIV by oral sex has been reported. There is general agreement that the risk from unprotected oral sex is significantly lower risk than unprotected vaginal or anal sex. However it is very difficult to assess the true oral risk because people rarely engage in only one type of sexual act. As a result some HIV transmission from oral sex will likely be misclassified to other more risky sex acts underestimating the true risk from oral sex. Another consideration is that I know of no study that that has the statically power to demonstrate the risk of transmission through unprotected oral sex with an HIV partner to be less than 1/3000. Even these studies, using diagnosed HIV+ subjects are destined to underestimate the true risk. For example many of study HIV subjects are on anti-retroviral drugs which would significantly reduce the viral load and the risk of HIV transmission The major threat of HIV infections comes from the very highly infectious recent seroconverts who are yet to be diagnosed and the 25% of the HIV infected population who are unaware they are infected because they have not been tested often because they are being irresponsible. One international group, the 4th International Oral AIDS Conference held in South Africa, estimated the risk of transmission through oral sex to be approximately 1/2500 per unprotected contact with an HIV partner.
Some will and have argue that this HIV transmission risk is “very low” or “extremely small” and the primary risk from unprotected oral sex to be concerned about is infection with other STDs which have a much higher transmission rate. However, in doing any risk assessment one should take into consideration the severity of the consequences. I am sure many of us will have much greater risk tolerance for an STDs like Gonorrhea Chlamydia and Syphilis which are curable. In contrast, HIV is incurable, potentially lethal or will require life-long therapy with expensive and toxic drugs for survival. Moreover as indicated before unlike genital infections, Gonorrhea, Chlamydia, Herpes, and HPV infections of the oro-pharynx from oro-genital contact are nearly always asymptomatic and other than serving as a reservoir for future infections usually pose negligible serious health consequences.
That said , is even a small risk 1/3000 per BBBJ something you should be concerned about? It should be intuitively clear that the risk increases with the number of BBBJ acts done. The risk also depends greatly on the probability that the client is HIV+ which is related to the prevalence of HIV in the population. For the hobby client age group this is about 1%. Using these values the BBBJ risk is 1/300,000 per act. To put this in a little perspective, this risk is 6 times higher than 1/ 2,000,000 the estimate risk for covered FS assuming a transmission rate of 1/1000 for unprotected FS with an HIV client and a 95% condom protection factor. It is not unrealistic for to think that ladies that choose providing as a long-term career may do at least 3000 BJ in her professional life. If so, she has a lifetime risk of 1% or 1 in 100 chance of being infected. It is up to each lady to decide for herself if this is an acceptable HIV risk for doing 3000 BBBJ. For me a 1% HIV risk would be an unacceptable risk. However I am a hobbyist and insertive partner who receives less than 20 BBBJ/year from a Practitioner and my risk is orders of magnitude less than hers and therefore BBBJ is an acceptable risk to me.
i could use some advice. i know that clients will be sorely unhappy if i stop providing BBBJs... and to be honest, i greatly enjoy providing them. i sincerely do love to please. that said, i don't know that it's worth the risk.
so i'm asking (since i'm not yet able to join the 'providers only' board)... to you, is a BBBJ worth the risk? should i change my policies? for the price, i think it is reasonable to demand protection...
i am in a polyamorous relationship, so there are other people potentially put at risk by providing this service, too. the more i think about it, the less i want to provide BBBJs -- but i'm not sure how i will handle any potential client uproar. :/ so i need reassurance, basically, i guess, lol.
to hobbyists, are you less likely to go to a girl who does not provide BBBJs? and any info. on the likelihood of spreading STDs via BBBJ would be greatly helpful... thanks in advance
I can really understand your concerns. As to asking me if BBBJs are worth the risk TO YOU...the only one who can answer that question is YOU. Risk assessment is one of the trickier things in the business of providing. Many solve the issue by simply closing their eyes and making it go away; others feel the pressure of statistics, health warnings, etc. and simply do everything covered.
As to "client uproar..." doubtful that there'll be one...I'd wager it will be more like pffffttt...some air will escape and they will feel deflated after hearing your decision, LOL. As to losing clients, well, it depends on how they found your BBBJs in the first place, and how much energy you put into it. If BBBJs truly are your passion and you do the memorable slurpy, eye-contact, tongue-flicking [I need to stop myself before I get all hot and bothered myself ] kind of work, then maybe you'll lose some. But if it's a small item on a very large menu, then I don't think the attrition will be so bad. Of course, I'm speaking of your "regulars." As to new people, yes, you probably are cutting out some potentials by changing your repertoire.
Clearly, if anyone, whether it's the giver or receiver, has herpes, chlamydia, syphilis, HIV, etc., it surely can transmit with BBBJ. But I have to say that in my years as a VERY sexually active person, with girlfriends who probably collectively screwed half of the entire male US population [yes, I did contribute, LOL], I only know of one case - a friend - who contracted vaginal HPV in the 1980s. The rest of us fucked and sucked ourselves silly from circa 1970 to 2000+, all of it bareback, and nothing happened.
But hey, there I go again...inserting my own personal bias in the matter..and it's most likely because all of this IS a very personal matter and a personal decision.
Check the website and then have a good think, the Love Goddess
Additionally there are plenty of providers that don't allow bbbj, at least for first time clients. If those providers can still get clients I wouldn't worry. There is market for everything, but if its really freaking you out remember to look out for yourself first.
well.. i DO put a lot of energy into BJs, mainly because it is my very favorite thing to do -- i honestly prefer giving a BJ to receiving just about ANYthing.
thank you very much for your feedback. i know a man who runs an agency and he said that in 15 years in the business he had never heard of a woman contracting an STI from a BBBJ ... but then again, i tend to be unlucky, so it wouldn't surprise me if i ended up being the exception.
and yes... to go off-topic briefly... my 'lily milk' (because my nickname is and always has been lily, and i am a lactating mother) is quite delicious. it's like the warm milk at the bottom of a bowl of cereal!
Hi Butterflydust I think as a lactating Mother, you might be understandably concerned about what you are passing from your body to your beautiful baby. You may be equally concerned about energetically transmitting any anxiety and fear to your baby during this precious time of life. They do pick up whatever you feel and so i think your questions now are very good ones. You want to feel 'right with the world' and are smart to be seeking answers so that can be your state of mind.
“But I have to say that in my years as a VERY sexually active person, with girlfriends who probably collectively screwed half of the entire male US population [yes, I did contribute, LOL], I only know of one case - a friend - who contracted vaginal HPV in the 1980s. The rest of us fucked and sucked ourselves silly from circa 1970 to 2000+, all of it bareback, and nothing happened.”
With all due respect if true it was dumb luck! 20 million new STD cases occur each year in the US and I can assure you vast majority were result of bareback sex. Gee, and in the 1970-80s the infection rate for some STDs like Gonorrhea and Syphilis were >3 times they are now in the post HIV era when we are more safety conscious. Perhaps the operative words in your response are “known of”. Most STD are asymptomatic, especially so in women. Chlamydia (which only became relatively lately a reportable STD because the medical profession was largely aware of the significance of Chlamydia in the 1980s.) is now the most frequently reported sexually transmitted disease in the United States and was certainly not adequately screened for in the 1970-1990s. With the advent of increase sensitive molecular test symptomatic and asymptomatic individuals are increasingly being diagnosed with Chlamydia infection. This is the major reason why Chlamydia infections rates during the last 10 years have substantially increase while the infection rate for other STDs have largely decline or stay the same. Even so most professional believe that Chlamydia infection is still undiagnosed by factor of 2-3. With respect to HPV you statement is even less plausible. HPV is the most frequently transmitted STD with an estimated 6 million new cases annually and about 50% of us will be eventually infected with HPV. Fortunately most of the time, HPV causes no symptoms or health problems and goes away by itself (even the carcinogenic ones) and most people never know they had HPV infection. HPV infection was not tested for in the past or event the present. This is especially so for those under 30 since HPV is very common and rarely causes cancer in this age group. Even so on a local board their have be a rash of ladies reporting they have cervical dysphasia which up to 90% may be cause by the HPV.
Yes I was clean-cut screwing guy in the 1970s-1980s, after the pill liberated us from the fear impregnated our partner, who got his share of STDs and antibiotic shots in the butt from doing unprotected sex. Yea, the good old pre HIV days when antibiotic resistant STDs were not a big problem and so easily treated.
The risk of spreading deadly STD through oral sex is generally considered to be extremely low - but it does exist. The risk of spreading less deadly but still ugly and inconvenient (at the least) disease is somewhat higher. Follow LGs link, check out authoratative sites like the CDC, National Health Org., Columbia Review, etc if you want statistical info.
Personally, I would not see a lady if I knew she did not provide BBBJ - it's a dealbreaker for me. For my part, I am very clean, test regularly, etc. I have never had any kind of STD in 10 years of hobbying and 15 years before that of promiscuous unprotected sex of all kinds. I'm neither bragging nor promoting unprotected activities, I'm just stating my case. I'm aware that there are risks involved and I choose to take them.
In your case, I wouldn't let me, or LG, or anyone decide how much risk YOU should take - as LG said, only you can make that decision. You shouldn't let the potential of lost business push you into taking risks that make you uncomfortable - on the other hand, if it gets to the point where you can't make the money you need to make, then you have hard decisions to make.
I don't suppose this is all that helpful but I thought I'd give my two cents. Good Luck!
First, the question. Are you prepared to do everything covered with your boyfriend? I gather from your posts that he has sex with other women and therefore he could become infected with a STD from another woman and and then pass it on to you. And, of course, should you become infected from a client it would reduce the risk of passing on the STD to him.
Now the thoughts. I won't quote the links again, but UCSF is an excellent source of information about HIV, which is the most dangerous STD in the sense that it is the only one (that I know of) which is life threatening (assuming proper medical care). UCSF does not use the term "safe sex" in conjunction with using condoms. It uses the term "safer sex." You should always remember that using a condom does NOT make you 100% safe. (For HIV condoms are regarded as being about 86% effective in preventing transmission of the disease from an infected male to an uninfected female in a single act of vaginal intercourse. Note that effectiveness drops sharply if the act is repeated over a period of time.)
The only thing that makes you 100% safe is having a disease free partner.
As for myself, I rarely orgasm with a condom and for me if BBBJs are not on the menu it is a deal breaker as far as paying for professional sex is concerned. I am willing to accept the slight increase in risk that goes with BBBJs. However, as LG says, it appears that STDs are quite rare amongst escorts and their clients. If I see evidence of that changing I will give up the hobby entirely. There is no risk, condom or no condom, if my partner doesn't have a STD. If my partner is likely to have a STD, I don't feel that a condom makes it safe enough to risk having sex. That is my personal decision. As LG says, everyone has to decide for himself or herself how much risk he or she is willing to tolerate.
“For HIV condoms are regarded as being about 86% effective in preventing transmission of the disease from an infected male to an uninfected female in a single act of vaginal intercourse.”
What is the support for this statement? In the laboratory condoms are greater than 99% effective. Breakage and slipping may reduce the condom effectiveness by 1-5% in vaginal sex but this should be less of problem with oral sex, the topic of this thread. Any additional condom failure is not from equipment failure but due to human failure in handling them and using them correctly. Perhaps you are referring to Haiti study that you have cited in the past. If so, the data is express per follow-up time (person-years) and not per act of vaginal intercourse. Reading the paper (Ann of Internal Medicine 125, 324-330, 1996) the investigators apparently did keep track of the number sexual contacts but did not indicate the number of sexual contacts in the condom and non condom use groups needed to make an accurate determination of the effectiveness of condoms in this study. Another problem is that only 1 serconversion occurred among the 42 couples that always used to condom. This one could have happen by chance especially considering since all 42 were not experience condom users.
I have had some good CBJ's but I am not a big fan of them either. BBBJ feels much nicer but the point is, there are many other interesting things that can be done.
One favorite provider of mine never does BJ's at all. Instead, her forte is a practice that I have only recently learned the name of, but she does it with me all the time and it turns me into a quavering puddle of jelly. It's call sumata, and involved her guiding my penis with her (well lubricated) hands and rubbing the tip of my penis again errogenous portions of her body.
It is really quite transcendent.
There are many other erotic practices that you could begin to employ and if you become good at them and really put your heart into it, I'm sure the guys will come calling.
I have to echo LG's main advice: If you are not comfortable with something, then don't do it. Ultimately that will serve no one.
The existence of pharyngeal Chlamydia, Gonorrhea, HPV and Herpes infections is well documented. Essential the only way you can get these pharyngeal STD infections is by oral sex. As the receptive partner you are at a much greater risk than your insertive oral sex partner. Since these STD mainly colonized the pharynx as opposed to the oral cavity the risk to the insertive partner may be greater for more penetrating oral sex (DT). Oral Gonorrhea, Chlamydia, HPV and Herpes are considerable under-diagnosed compare the diagnosis of theses infection in anus and genitals. These STD infections which are nearly always asymptomatic are not normally screened for or part of typical ordered STD panel. One reason is they rarely present a real health threat compared to the same infection of the genitals other than present a reservoir for future infections. Also those individuals orally infected are more likely to have the infection in the genital than vise-versa. Screening and treating genital infections of the treatable STDs with systemic antibiotic therapy will also eradicate many oral infections that also exist.
HIV on the other hand is a systemic infection and does not localize at the site of infection. Transmission of HIV by oral sex has been reported. There is general agreement that the risk from unprotected oral sex is significantly lower risk than unprotected vaginal or anal sex. However it is very difficult to assess the true oral risk because people rarely engage in only one type of sexual act. As a result some HIV transmission from oral sex will likely be misclassified to other more risky sex acts underestimating the true risk from oral sex. Another consideration is that I know of no study that that has the statically power to demonstrate the risk of transmission through unprotected oral sex with an HIV partner to be less than 1/3000. Even these studies, using diagnosed HIV+ subjects are destined to underestimate the true risk. For example many of study HIV subjects are on anti-retroviral drugs which would significantly reduce the viral load and the risk of HIV transmission The major threat of HIV infections comes from the very highly infectious recent seroconverts who are yet to be diagnosed and the 25% of the HIV infected population who are unaware they are infected because they have not been tested often because they are being irresponsible. One international group, the 4th International Oral AIDS Conference held in South Africa, estimated the risk of transmission through oral sex to be approximately 1/2500 per unprotected contact with an HIV partner.
Some will and have argue that this HIV transmission risk is “very low” or “extremely small” and the primary risk from unprotected oral sex to be concerned about is infection with other STDs which have a much higher transmission rate. However, in doing any risk assessment one should take into consideration the severity of the consequences. I am sure many of us will have much greater risk tolerance for an STDs like Gonorrhea Chlamydia and Syphilis which are curable. In contrast, HIV is incurable, potentially lethal or will require life-long therapy with expensive and toxic drugs for survival. Moreover as indicated before unlike genital infections, Gonorrhea, Chlamydia, Herpes, and HPV infections of the oro-pharynx from oro-genital contact are nearly always asymptomatic and other than serving as a reservoir for future infections usually pose negligible serious health consequences.
That said , is even a small risk 1/3000 per BBBJ something you should be concerned about? It should be intuitively clear that the risk increases with the number of BBBJ acts done. The risk also depends greatly on the probability that the client is HIV+ which is related to the prevalence of HIV in the population. For the hobby client age group this is about 1%. Using these values the BBBJ risk is 1/300,000 per act. To put this in a little perspective, this risk is 6 times higher than 1/ 2,000,000 the estimate risk for covered FS assuming a transmission rate of 1/1000 for unprotected FS with an HIV client and a 95% condom protection factor. It is not unrealistic for to think that ladies that choose providing as a long-term career may do at least 3000 BJ in her professional life. If so, she has a lifetime risk of 1% or 1 in 100 chance of being infected. It is up to each lady to decide for herself if this is an acceptable HIV risk for doing 3000 BBBJ. For me a 1% HIV risk would be an unacceptable risk. However I am a hobbyist and insertive partner who receives less than 20 BBBJ/year from a Practitioner and my risk is orders of magnitude less than hers and therefore BBBJ is an acceptable risk to me.
I am new to the board and researching the hobby (not had the first meet yet). If you did not require me to condom I would think that I was at risk - I'd take a hand job and leave without any thought of returning
Unfortunately it looks like your attempt to purchase VIP membership has failed due to your card being declined. Good news is that we have several other payment options that you could try.
VIP MEMBER
, you are now a VIP member!
We thank you for your purchase!
VIP MEMBER
, Thank you for becoming VIP member!
Membership should be activated shortly. You'll receive notification!
] kind of work, then maybe you'll lose some. But if it's a small item on a very large menu, then I don't think the attrition will be so bad. Of course, I'm speaking of your "regulars." As to new people, yes, you probably are cutting out some potentials by changing your repertoire.