Since I, too, am somewhat paranoid about STDs, especially herpes since I love BBBJ but not CBJ, I once asked my doctor about the opportunites/possibilities of transfer.
Mostly, writings about herpes speak to its extreme virulency and how even if a carrier does not have a sore that's showing the virus can still be transmitted because the virus hides in cells that can be sloughed off by friction and thereby transmitted.
My doctor was not so absolute about in his opinions about this. Open sores are, of course, extremely virulent. However, he said that if a person had one or two outbreaks in the the same place over a few years and then no recoccurrence, then the chances of transmission were very very low. In other words, only consistently reoccurring outbreaks in the same place are likely to spread even though there may be no visible evidence of a sore.
How true this is is probably open to debate, but it's what he said, which seems to indicate that the transmission of herpes exists on somewhat of a continuum from very virulent to quite low.
I've been doing my research and of the potential risks of the bbbj, the one that worries me the most is herpes, especially since it can sometimes be spread when an infected partner is showing no symptoms.
Given that most providers get tested regularly, is there any delicate way to ask if she knows if she has herpes?
Simply ask her. Most women are not going to be offended by a forthright question.
Unfortunately, don't expect honesty either. If the lady has the herpes simplex virus, the virus taht causes cold sores, and which can in some cases be spread to the genitals - she isn't very likely to be honest about it. Recently, I actually saw a website from a proivder who clearly stated on her homepage that she has herpes, but takes great care to reduce the chances of spreading the virus. I deeply admire her honesty, but I am afraid she is without doubt an extreme rarity. More likely, if a woman does in fact have the virus, it is very unlikely that she will admit it to you.
But as I stated, there is no harm in asking, and your concern is a valid one. Unfortunately, there is no easy answer to eliminate your risk. Staying with well reviewed ladies with good reputations is your best bet to reduce your risk, or opting for a cover if it gives you better peace of mind.
The cheeky tart has spoken :o )
You are making a couple of potentially bad assumptions here. #1, where has it ever been posted or written that most providers get tested regularly? I'm not saying that the smart ones don't and I'm not saying that the smart ones are not careful but I wouldn't assume anything unless you are talking about seeing a lady at a legal Nevada brothel where testing is mandatory. Secondly, do you really expect an honest answer from a lady who has it? She may handle the question well but you really have no way of knowing if she is telling you the truth or not. I suppose you could ask for paperwork but that's going to limit the number of ladies that are available to you significantly.
We all have to do what feels right for us. If you don't feel comfortable with bbbj simply ask for cbj.
According to a well known San Fran health site, the lady is at more risk from a bbbj than you will ever be. However, if memory serves me correctly herpes is the one thing you could catch against about 5 things she can get from you.
This question about getting tested....how often would a provider need to get tested if she sees between 20 and 40 guys a month? And even if she was tested yesterday and saw someone who was infected with something, the mear fact that she will get tested in another month or three will make not much difference to her outcome or to the mnen she will be seeing till her next test, that is depending upon the incubatioin time of the disease/s. Therefore for women who take certain risks, the testing is more about when you get something, not if you get something and the ability to treat it swiftly. Any thoughts?.
Since I, too, am somewhat paranoid about STDs, especially herpes since I love BBBJ but not CBJ, I once asked my doctor about the opportunites/possibilities of transfer.
Mostly, writings about herpes speak to its extreme virulency and how even if a carrier does not have a sore that's showing the virus can still be transmitted because the virus hides in cells that can be sloughed off by friction and thereby transmitted.
My doctor was not so absolute about in his opinions about this. Open sores are, of course, extremely virulent. However, he said that if a person had one or two outbreaks in the the same place over a few years and then no recoccurrence, then the chances of transmission were very very low. In other words, only consistently reoccurring outbreaks in the same place are likely to spread even though there may be no visible evidence of a sore.
How true this is is probably open to debate, but it's what he said, which seems to indicate that the transmission of herpes exists on somewhat of a continuum from very virulent to quite low.